For More News, Visit... The Hardcore News Web Site!

Thursday, December 11, 2014

CIA cites Israeli court ruling to “justify” torture program

Shared values: the US and Israel have used similar arguments
to “defend” human rights abuses. (
Official White House photo)
Submitted by Rania Khalek on Wed, 12/10/2014 - 
The CIA repeatedly cited an Israeli high court decision to justify torture, according to the long-awaited US Senate report on the agency’s torture program.
This latest disclosure comes just months after revelations that the Obama administration relied on an Israeli high court ruling to justify targeted killings of American citizens without trial. 
Released Tuesday by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence after months of stalling, the nearly 600-page report discloses new details about the atrocities that took place at the CIA’s network of rendition and torture sites created in the aftermath of the 11 September 2001 attacks. 
The CIA’s torture techniques — which included water-boarding, sleep and sensory deprivation, sexual torture, threats to kill and rape loved ones, mock executions, electrocution and medically unnecessary “rectal feeding” — were far more gruesome and pervasive than the agency let on.
Furthermore, the report explicitly states that the CIA lied about the torture program’s effectiveness, falsely claiming its techniques successfully extracted information that thwarted terrorist plots, including a fabricated attack “in Saudi Arabia against Israel.” 
As the CIA engaged in a deceptive propaganda campaign to mislead the American public about the program’s lawfulness and effectiveness, it relied on Israeli precedent as a legal defense.

How to legalize torture

As early as November 2001, CIA officials began brainstorming possible legal justifications for torture techniques they were already employing at black sites around the globe, culminating in a draft memorandum described by the Senate report as follows:
On 26 November 2001, attorneys in the CIA’s Office of General Counsel circulated a draft legal memorandum describing the criminal prohibition on torture and a potential “novel” legal defense for CIA officers who engaged in torture. The memorandum stated that the “CIA could argue that the torture was necessary to prevent imminent, significant, physical harm to persons, where there is no other available means to prevent the harm,” adding that “states may be very unwilling to call the US to task for torture when it resulted in saving thousands of lives.”
According to the corresponding footnote, the November memo “cited the ‘Israeli example’ as a possible basis for arguing that ‘torture was necessary to prevent imminent, significant, physical harm to persons, where there is no other available means to prevent the harm.’”
The “Israeli example” was invoked again the following year in an official memorandum to the White House Office of Legal Council to the President on 1 August 2002, which “include[d] a similar analysis of the ‘necessity defense’ in response to potential charges of torture.”

Israeli loopholes

The “Israeli example” is a reference to the 1999 Israeli high court decision that supposedly outlawed the use of torture — the Israeli euphemism for which is “moderate physical pressure” — to extract confessions from Palestinian prisoners, a longstanding and widespread practice up until that time. The Israeli human rights group B’Tselemcelebrated the ruling at the time, declaring it a victory for democracy. 
In reality, the decision was filled with obvious loopholes and merely limited the circumstances under which torture techniques could be legally employed. (Israel’s high court is also known as its supreme court.)
Till this day Israeli torture of Palestinian prisoners remains widespread and no Palestinian is immune, not even children, who are systematically subjected to solitary confinement, sensory deprivation and stress positions in Israeli custody. 
Last winter, Israeli cruelty reached new heights when its prison services placed Palestinian child detainees in outdoor cages during one of the most severe winter storms to strike the region in years. 
As the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) has argued, not a great deal has changed since the 1999 ruling due in large part to the high court’s inclusion of the “necessity defense” — a loophole that immunizes interrogators who use torture techniques from being held criminally liable based on the argument that they had to do it out of “necessity” to prevent loss of or harm to human life. 
Such loopholes have led to absolute impunity for Israeli torturers. Of the more than 800 complaints of torture submitted by Palestinian prisoners since 2001, exactly zero have led to criminal investigations despite the state corroborating at least 15 percent of the torture allegations, according to PCATI.
It is also notable that even the CIA methods revealed in the Senate report bear striking similarity to long-standing Israeli torture techniques documented by human rights organizations, among them sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme cold, confinement in very small spaces and painful “stress positions.” These are techniques that are thought to inflict maximum suffering while minimizing the risk that they will leave tell-tale signs of torture on the victim’s body. 

A ticking time bomb fiction

Strangely, even notable anti-torture liberals have been duped into believing that Israel banned torture.
US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has cited the Israeli high court decision on torture as an exemplary ban the US should emulate.
“The police think that a suspect they have apprehended knows where and when a bomb is going to go off,” Ginsburg told The New York Times. “Can the police use torture to extract that information? And in an eloquent decision by Aharon Barak, then the chief justice of Israel, the court said: ‘Torture? Never.’”
According to Ginsburg, the Israeli ruling sent the message “that we could hand our enemies no greater victory than to come to look like that enemy in our disregard for human dignity.” 
Ginsburg’s takeaway from the Israeli decision is as erroneous as her racist portraryal of a Palestinian “enemy” lacking in “human dignity.” 
Far from banning torture altogether, the Israeli decision includes an unambiguous exemption for the hypothetical scenario Ginsburg lays out.
In the event of a “ticking time bomb” scenario, the Israeli decision states that “necessity defense” gives Israeli interrogators discretion to employ torture to extract information to stop an explosive from detonating.
It should be noted that even the Senate report concedes that the “ticking time bomb” so often invoked by torture enthusiasts has no basis in reality.
But even if it did, Article 2 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment states: ”No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”

Turning to Israel for inspiration

In a desperate bid to keep the torture program alive amid growing (albeit weak) pressure from Congress in 2005, a CIA official once again turned to Israel for inspiration and a legal rationale:
The CIA attorney described the “striking” similarities between the public debate surrounding the McCain amendment [a proposed ban on torture] and the situation in Israel in 1999, in which the Israeli Supreme Court had “ruled that several … techniques were possibly permissible, but require some form of legislative sanction,” and that the Israeli government “ultimately got limited legislative authority for a few specific techniques.”
The corresponding footnote adds:
The CIA attorney also described the Israeli precedent with regard to the “necessity defense” that had been invoked by CIA attorneys and the Department of Justice in 2001 and 2002. The CIA attorney wrote that the Israeli Supreme Court “also specifically considered the ‘ticking time bomb’ scenario and said that enhanced techniques could not be pre-approved for such situations, but that if worse came to worse, an officer who engaged in such activities could assert a common-law necessity defense, if he were ever prosecuted.”
This suggestion was adapted into a 20 July 2007 memorandum authored by then Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel Steven G. Bradbury, who argued that based on the Israeli court case, CIA torture is “clearly authorized and justified by legislative authority.”

Sharing values

It should come as no surprise that the US is following Israel’s lead on torture given that the two nations feed off of one another’s atrocities. 
When Palestinian prisoners launched a hunger strike earlier this year to protest their indefinite detention, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attempted to push through the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, a bill that would permit the force-feeding of prisoners. According to human rights groups, force-feeding amounts to cruel and inhumane punishment.
To excuse his demand for the implementation of the excruciatingly painful technique, wherein a tube is shoved through the nostril into the stomach, Netanyahu pointed to US force-feedings at Guantanamo Bay. 
When it comes to torture, few people understand the shared values that unite the US and Israel better than Rasmea Odeh.
The 67-year-old Palestinian American activist was convicted last month of immigration fraud for failing to disclose a 1969 Israeli military court conviction based on a confession extracted under weeks of Israeli sexual torture
At the behest of the Obama administration’s Justice Department, the trial judge barredthe jury from hearing evidence about Odeh’s torture, protecting and ultimately legitimizing Israel’s system of abuse. Meanwhile, Odeh was subjected to further torture, this time at the hands of the US government, which placed her in solitary confinement for twelve consecutive days for no apparent reason until a judge ordered on Monday that she could be released on bail. 
While the depth of collusion between the US and Israeli torture programs has yet to be fully unearthed there is reason to suspect that some US methods were modeled on Israel’s.
Since the 11 September 2001 attacks, the US has fashioned much of its counterterrorism strategy on Israel’s decades-long suppression of Palestinian resistance to its colonial ambitions. 
Invented by Israel for use against Palestinian leaders, extrajudicial targeted killings are now the centerpiece of the Obama administration’s counterterrorism policy. 
Like its targeted killing policy, Israel has spent decades perfecting torture techniques on Palestinian prisoners, designed to maximize the suffering while leaving behind few visible scars. 
So, how much did Israel influence the CIA? Perhaps the answer can be found in the original 6,000-page, still-classified Senate torture report that Tuesday’s release is based on. It makes one wonder what is being left out of the public record. 
Editor’s note: an earlier version of this post stated that Rasmea Odeh was released from US detention on Monday. It since been corrected.
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/rania-khalek/cia-cites-israeli-court-ruling-justify-torture-program 

CIA relied on Israeli Supreme Court rulings to justify torture, Senate report says

The 9/11 Delusion: Israel’s False Flag, Jingoism And Inhumanity

‘Israeli example’ cited to back for use of torture when interrogating terror suspects ‘where there is no other available means to prevent the harm’ they might inflict.

HAARETZ

The scathing report published Tuesday by the United States Senate Intelligence Committee on the CIA’s interrogation of terror suspects reveals that the CIA’s lawyers used the rulings of Israel’s Supreme Court to construct a legal case justifying torture.

According to the 528-page document, a redacted version of the 6,000-page report that remains classified, in November 2001 some CIA officers were concerned they may need legal justification for the interrogation methods they had begun using when questioning Al-Qaida suspects in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

In a draft memorandum prepared by the CIA’s Office of General Counsel, the “Israeli example” was cited as a possible justification that “torture was necessary to prevent imminent, significant, physical harm to persons, where there is no other available means to prevent the harm.”

The “Israeli example” refers to the conclusions of the Landoi Commission in 1987 and subsequent Supreme Court rulings that forbid Israel’s security services from using torture in interrogation of terror suspects, but allows the use of “moderate physical pressure” in cases which are classified as a “ticking bomb,” when there is an urgent need to obtain information which could prevent an imminent terror attack.

Over the years, Israeli human rights organizations led by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel have petitioned the Supreme Court a number of times, and succeeded in outlawing various interrogation methods which the Shin Bet continued to use.

In 2005, as members of the U.S. Congress began asking more questions regarding the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation techniques,” the intelligence agency began planning a public-relations campaign to drum up support for its methods.

According to the Senate Intelligence Committee, the CIA attorney preparing the campaign “described the ‘striking’ similarities between the public debate surrounding the McCain amendment (a congressional act passed in December 2005 regulating interrogation methods) and the situation in Israel in 1999, in which the Israeli Supreme Court had ‘ruled that several… techniques were possibly permissible, but require some form of legislative sanction,’ and that the Israeli government ultimately got limited legislative authority for a few specific techniques.”

The CIA attorney also referred to the Israeli Supreme Court’s “ticking time bomb” scenario and said that “enhanced techniques could not be preapproved for such situations, but that if worse came to worse, an officer who engaged in such activities could assert a common-law necessity defense, if he were ever prosecuted.”

CIA cited Israeli Supreme Court rulings to justify torture, Senate report says

'Israeli example' cited as possible justification for use of torture when interrogating terror suspects 'where there is no other available means to prevent the harm' they might inflict.


The scathing report published Tuesday by the United States Senate Intelligence Committee on the CIA's interrogation of terror suspects reveals that the CIA's lawyers used the rulings of Israel's Supreme Court to construct a legal case justifying torture.
According to the 528-page document, a redacted version of the 6,000-page report that remains classified, in November 2001 some CIA officers were concerned they may need legal justification for the interrogation methods they had begun using when questioning Al-Qaida suspects in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.
In a draft memorandum prepared by the CIA's Office of General Counsel, the "Israeli example" was cited as a possible justification that "torture was necessary to prevent imminent, significant, physical harm to persons, where there is no other available means to prevent the harm."
The "Israeli example" refers to the conclusions of the Landau Commission in 1987 and subsequent Supreme Court rulings that forbid Israel's security services from using torture in interrogation of terror suspects, but allows the use of "moderate physical pressure" in cases which are classified as a "ticking bomb," when there is an urgent need to obtain information which could prevent an imminent terror attack.
Over the years, Israeli human rights organizations led by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel have petitioned the Supreme Court a number of times, and succeeded in outlawing various interrogation methods which the Shin Bet continued to use.
In 2005, as members of the U.S. Congress began asking more questions regarding the CIA's "enhanced interrogation techniques," the intelligence agency began planning a public-relations campaign to drum up support for its methods.
According to the Senate Intelligence Committee, the CIA attorney preparing the campaign "described the 'striking' similarities between the public debate surrounding the McCain amendment (a congressional act passed in December 2005 regulating interrogation methods) and the situation in Israel in 1999, in which the Israeli Supreme Court had 'ruled that several... techniques were possibly permissible, but require some form of legislative sanction,' and that the Israeli government ultimately got limited legislative authority for a few specific techniques."
The CIA attorney also referred to the Israeli Supreme Court's "ticking time bomb" scenario and said that "enhanced techniques could not be preapproved for such situations, but that if worse came to worse, an officer who engaged in such activities could assert a common-law necessity defense, if he were ever prosecuted."
An Al-Qaida plot? 
Israel is mentioned in one other connection in the redacted version of the report. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the Al-Qaida operative who planned the 9/11 attacks, was captured by the CIA and the Pakistani intelligence service and was tortured in his interrogations. According to the report, Mohammed told his interrogators about plans by Al-Qaida to carry out attacks on various targets including "an Israeli embassy in the Middle East," among other information. 
While Israel has Middle East embassies only in Egypt and Jordan, in another place, the report says that Mohammed spoke of "a terrorist plot in Saudi Arabia against Israel." Israel has no diplomatic relations with the Saudis, though there is a great deal of coordination between the two countries beneath the radar. It is unclear what Israeli target the CIA claim that Al-Qaida were planning to attack, but the report also says that "much of this (Mohammed's) information was inaccurate." 

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

LEAKED: BILDERBERG CLOSING REMARKS 2014 [MUST READ]

The depopulation agenda is still on course. Their greed is unfathomable, they just don’t want to share life of immortality and abundance. They want to have it all! 

Leaked Bilderberg Closing Remarks – 2014

From: http://www.lecontrarien.com/ (translated below)
” EXCLUSIVE SCOOP: the top secret classified report of the last meeting of Bilderberg … “
My dear contrarians, my dear contrarians!
This is a special edition, very special that I propose today. I would like you to understand the real ways of the world, the world in which we live but more likely for very long time.
I reproduce in lines below the exclusive report of the last meeting of Bilderberg, this meeting which is held every year and which attend personalities of very high level of all the countries of the world. It is in this kind of inner circle set that, for decades, shapes the world of tomorrow.
Before addressing the bulk of the document which has been leaked, I suggest you watch this video of TF1. It dates back 40 years! Well almost, 1977 to be exact, and yet …
[In this 1977 video, TF1 journalist Yves Mourousi is speaking of the pronouncing of the Bilderburg meetings, of inner circle officials of different countries meeting, and with British journalist Gordon Tether speaking of the attendees, of how people of power bemade.Yves Mourousi speak that they would surely speak again about the Bilderburgers.But, not so. There was no more of the reporting by news journalists of the Bilderburgers after this. Gordon Tether's articles were banned, and when he refused to comply with the news medias ban of reporting on Bilderburgs, he was fired and banned from all news organizations.
Other news journalists got the message,----comply or else.]
http://rutube.ru/video/16d8a0a2526584d9c…8e51fc603/
[The above video is on a page with several other videos and it appears to be all in Russian. For our purposed here, it then seems meaningless. ~J]
Record account of annual meeting. Classified Top Secret. For exclusive use of members.

Closing Remarks by the Chairman of the meeting.

Beyond capitalism. Crossing the new frontier.

If we continue to maintain control of the masses by the classical wage labor within a framework of a system built on mass production and mass consumption with the solvency of the consumers by allocating a portion of the wealth created via work, we all have now acquired the certainty that the long-term survival of the human species, the backup and the sustainability of a viable biosphere and in harmony with the human activities required a total reorganization of our modes of thought, organization and production.
As we all know, in fact the goal we are pursuing is neither totally vain accumulation of new wealth or even the rescue of an economic system, it was used for more than three centuries and become incompatible with our vision of the future.
The objective which we pursue is obviously the one of the eternal life, or in any case the passage to the man living two centuries and we join here the ambitious ideas of transhumanism which we wish to develop, to install to favor the emergence of a new human being. Of a superman. As well as our technologies allow us from now on to possess said tools of “augmented reality”, our researches perfectly succeeded as regards “the increased man”. Our technologies are perfectly developed. We are ready to live two centuries. Our nanotechnologies allow us to repair the bodies of the inside, the decoding of the human genome allowed us to understand the functioning of the cellular aging which we are not capable of stopping, but of slowing down considerably. Our control of stem cells allows us to re-make at the demand any cellular tissue or still obviously any organ which would become failing.
Finally, our control of the human genome allows us as well to select the most effective and most adapted genetic heritages, without forgetting the fact that by modifying some we can finally increase our physical as well mental abilities.
Our illustrious predecessors of the 30s thought naively that we could transpose, for the improvement of the human race, the methods used for the optimization of dog breeds by crossings skilfully organized. Nevertheless, these failures of the “Nazism” allowed us to explore new ways and to reach the success which we celebrate today. We finally uncovered the secrets of the eternal life, the ultimate conquest of the man become finally his own god and his own master. We are all, us here gathered, Alpha and Omega of this New World which opens to us and which it is thus advisable to us to shape.
Obviously, as you know, it raises absolutely colossal problems of implementation and it was all the challenge in the works of the various committees in which you participated throughout these intense days of seminar.
We have all an acute consciousness of the fact that the planet and our environment cannot obviously support the eternal life of tens of billion human beings who would consume in the same way as today. We know all that an infinite growth, including demographics in a finite world is an intellectual aberration. We all understood that to divide the world into two castes, that of the mortal and the immortal, would simply be impossible because in one case we suggest to live and to the others to die, so putting working and mainstream masses in a situation where they would have nothing to lose any more, except I remind to you that the main tool of the control of the peoples passes by the fact of granting benefits calculated allowing to give the illusion of a loss in case of rebellion.
The whole of these fact returns the deployment of the technologies of immortality and improvement of the man simply impossible for the moment.
The working groups have therefore submitted a number of proposals that were discussed by the full committee. I’ll just cite the most important measures that were passed unanimously in accordance with our privacy practices of our Grand Masters. It will be up to apply and implement each in your respective country and geographical area of influence, the following decisions.
The initial objective is the massive depopulation in protecting at best the environment, which is tantamount to exclude from the fields of our possible use of any nuclear weapons which would be tantamount to inflicting some irreparable damage to our so small planet. which is to exclude from the scope of our possible use of any nuclear weapons that would inflict some irreparable damage to our planet so small. The resources that we have are few in number, but their cumulative efficiency is certain since in returning to resonance we will get what the military call a “multiplier effect of force”. It is the triptych. economic collapse, civil war and massive epidemics. The use of these three tools should allow us to eventually reduce the world population from 7-10 billion inhabitants. We think that to reach our objective of 500 million human beings alive is illusory and that in spite of all our efforts of reduction, pockets of survivors will remain almost everywhere throughout the planet. Nevertheless, these pockets should not raise us of major problems, at least at first because of their disorganization, their isolation and their incapacity to master all the techniques if only current because of their weak number should limit considerably their power of nuisance. We think that in some years many will disappear and that little who will remain will return more or less quickly to the wild in a few generations. Any group that threatens us is, in all cases, treated quickly.
Our main historic enemy to the implementation of our plan was obviously the national states. Globalization, globalization, European institutions, mass immigration were so many tools that we have used with great success for 30 years and now national identities and feelings of belonging were significantly reduced, as patriotic feelings. Money and ownership have become the core values ​​of many. The politicization of the masses has been significantly reduced, nations as we hoped, become fragile and can now be destabilized from within.
We thus have to pursue with constancy the immigration policy allowing to make considerable masses of poor people come from the South into impoverished countries of the North. We have to with constancy make rise the most radical Islam to instigate at the most the hatreds and the dissension in the peoples. When we will bring economic collapse, then the most absurd that we have developed in each country lead most of these countries to large-scale civil wars where each community will be responsible for us to kill the largest number communitarianism members of the other community. When we shall provoke the economic collapse, then the most absurd communitarianism which we have developed in every country will conduct the largest part of these countries towards large-scale civil wars where every community will take charge for our account to kill the largest number of the members of the opposite community.
Blacks against whites in the USA, Muslim against Christians in Europe, these civil wars will have the immense advantage to destroy the people without confrontations between degenerate countries into nuclear power world war . Finally, when the wars will destroy countries, we shall take advantage of it to amplify the distribution of viruses such as our project of e-bola 2.0 modified genetically which we test at present with efficiency because we obtain invaluable epidemiological, sociological data (behavior of the individuals in front of the disease) but we also visualize our capacity to saturate systems of care which will be already considerably degraded, in every case, by the civil wars which we shall have created on the example of the war between the two Ukraines.
All these elements, lack of preparation of the peoples, their dependence towards all the support systems will make them particularly vulnerable to our various actions. The economic collapse should quickly propagate to the whole planet. China will collapse under the weight of social unrests and Russia, which still raises us problems at the moment, should see its problem settled in 2015 as we hope for it, but lets say that for the moment it is the Russian-Chinese axis which sets the biggest resistance against our vision of future. We do not exclude, if we did not manage to convince, to use the weapon of the assassination targeted towards personalities refusing our program of depopulation and the support to our ideology of the eternal life.
Obviously, for all those who would not have understood it, what you have just read has no relationship with the reality and any resemblance with one or several existing characters would be purely coincidental (or not….). It is of course about science fiction (or not completely….). It was just the short story, taken out of my fertile mind (or elsewhere…), which I wanted to tell you. You can of course fall to sleep again quietly.
Let us say that it is just about the starting point of the fact that could be a novel (or not…..) but the fact remains that, like as any story, it raises real questions.
The eternal life, which is at the heart of the strategy of a company as Google (among which the links with the most secret authorities of the USA as the NSA or CIA are clearly demonstrated), asks the question of the possibility of the accessibility of all to the eternal life. Can we be 10, 20 or 30 billion human beings to populate the planet and to consume? The answer is naturally negative, then in such a necessarily hypothetical case, than would we make men and women too? Read here an excellent article of the JDD on the Laurent Alexandre’s last book ” the death of the death ” detailing the strategy of Google.
The transhumanism is not a fancy of the mind, it is even an ideology fundamentally profoundly disgusting that always existed even if it bore other names in other times. The transhumanism develops even in a relatively transparent way with almost bare face and finally, nobody finds so much anything wrong there, but that will there be a man when the man will scientifically be improved to become a superman, and does not it still remind you anything?
Other question, we begin finally to speak a little about the devastation that is going to cause the arrival of robotics, and France too even dedicated a report on this matter on the JT (TV NEWS) of 20 hours of yesterday on this study which announces the disappearance of 3 million jobs in France before 2025 – but I can assure you that it will be much more and much more fast – and which gives us fast a reason for hope by going to show us a company of aeronautics which even started work at the same time as it installed……. a robot!
All this brings us to two thorough questions. The first one it is that factually, by eliminating all the jobs and the working maximum to optimize the earnings, companies finally get out quite a shot in the forward foot because obviously, there will not be a solvent consumer anymore and thus of profit, then why to pursue this policy, wherever from the idea in reality the system does not try to save itself but “to surpass itself” and, from now on, the border of division between the rich and the poor people is not so much the money than the access to the eternal life.
Other big question, corollary of the first elements, you can see that the man sees his “marginal utility” collapsing. Mao said that a man was a mouth to be nourished but two arms (to work). Simple but justified economic calculation. The man with the two arms it is a “working strength”. Moreover, all our economy is based on this type of postulate. Nevertheless we see well that the man becomes useless and will become especially even more as the new machines which arrive will allow to make everything, or almost, without human intervention. The humanoids can replace us for 95 % of the tasks, while what will remain to the man?
If I want to believe in the ability of humanity to share and exceed all its faults, let us be reasonable, human history proves that there is little chance that we live in a world of Carebears where everyone would be nice and nobody would lack anything … So what about all those arms becoming too perfectly useless, I would say obsolete. How to solve the problem we could say modestly.
If we take the arguments after “environmentalists” and “transhumanists”, it seems only logical that a drastic depopulation policy would overcome the problems we face and these arguments, as odious as they are, are intellectually unstoppable. We have become too numerous, the planet can not sustain the current number of people in the current economic system, our ecological footprint is unbearable and we no longer have any need of labor. Finally, we could almost live forever, or the quest for eternity is obviously a human temptation since the dawn of time.
So of course, all this is the pure fiction…. and yet … If Mao said that a mouth to feed it was two useful arms, today he would say a mouth, it is always a mouth of excess, especially when there are 7 billions and when the arms, soon, will not be of no use any more. And Mao, the great humanist, what would he have done in such a context?
It is already too late. Get ready and stay tuned in.
Till tomorrow … if you would not mind !!
Charles SANNAT
“By trying to stifle peaceful revolutions, it makes the inevitable violent revolution” (JFK)
This is an article ‘ presslib ‘, that is free of reproduction in all or in part provided that the present paragraph is reproduced in its continuation. Contrarien Matin is an every day life (daily paper) of deciphering without concession of the economic current events published(edited) by the company AuCOFFRE.com. Article writes by Charles SANNAT, director of the economic studies. Please visit our site. You can subscribe free of charge http://www.lecontrarien.com.
“The National Assembly is still hostage of Thomas Thévenoud who is still an MP. Think about it. Do not forget. “
(To protest peacefully and with humor, do not hesitate to to resume this phrase at the bottom of all your emails, your articles or your publications, there is no copyright !!)

Would you like to know how you can defeat Ebola and the Depopulation Agenda?

Defeating any viral attack and scaremongering is easy once you know the ultimate secret they’ve been keeping. Find out more about it here.

List of Participants

FRACastries, Henri deChairman and CEO, AXA Group
  
DEUAchleitner, Paul M.Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank AG
DEUAckermann, JosefFormer CEO, Deutsche Bank AG
GBRAgius, MarcusNon-Executive Chairman, PA Consulting Group
FINAlahuhta, MattiMember of the Board, KONE; Chairman, Aalto University Foundation
GBRAlexander, HelenChairman, UBM plc
USAAlexander, Keith B.Former Commander, U.S. Cyber Command; Former Director, National Security Agency
USAAltman, Roger C.Executive Chairman, Evercore
FINApunen, MattiDirector, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA
DEUAsmussen, JörgState Secretary of Labour and Social Affairs
HUNBajnai, GordonFormer Prime Minister; Party Leader, Together 2014
GBRBalls, Edward M.Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer
PRTBalsemão, Francisco PintoChairman, Impresa SGPS
FRABaroin, FrançoisMember of Parliament (UMP); Mayor of Troyes
FRABaverez, NicolasPartner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
USABerggruen, NicolasChairman, Berggruen Institute on Governance
ITABernabè, FrancoChairman, FB Group SRL
DNKBesenbacher, FlemmingChairman, The Carlsberg Group
NLDBeurden, Ben vanCEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
SWEBildt, CarlMinister for Foreign Affairs
NORBrandtzæg, Svein RichardPresident and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA
INTBreedlove, Philip M.Supreme Allied Commander Europe
AUTBronner, OscarPublisher, Der STANDARD Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.
SWEBuskhe, HåkanPresident and CEO, Saab AB
TURÇandar, CengizSenior Columnist, Al Monitor and Radikal
ESPCebrián, Juan LuisExecutive Chairman, Grupo PRISA
FRAChalendar, Pierre-André deChairman and CEO, Saint-Gobain
CANClark, W. EdmundGroup President and CEO, TD Bank Group
INTCoeuré, BenoîtMember of the Executive Board, European Central Bank
IRLCoveney, SimonMinister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine
GBRCowper-Coles, SherardSenior Adviser to the Group Chairman and Group CEO, HSBC Holdings plc
BELDavignon, EtienneMinister of State
USADonilon, Thomas E.Senior Partner, O’Melveny and Myers; Former U.S. National Security Advisor
DEUDöpfner, MathiasCEO, Axel Springer SE
GBRDudley, RobertGroup Chief Executive, BP plc
FINEhrnrooth, HenrikChairman, Caverion Corporation, Otava and Pöyry PLC
ITAElkann, JohnChairman, Fiat S.p.A.
DEUEnders, ThomasCEO, Airbus Group
DNKFederspiel, UlrikExecutive Vice President, Haldor Topsøe A/S
USAFeldstein, Martin S.Professor of Economics, Harvard University; President Emeritus, NBER
CANFerguson, BrianPresident and CEO, Cenovus Energy Inc.
GBRFlint, Douglas J.Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
ESPGarcía-Margallo, José ManuelMinister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation
USAGfoeller, MichaelIndependent Consultant
TURGöle, NilüferProfessor of Sociology, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
USAGreenberg, Evan G.Chairman and CEO, ACE Group
GBRGreening, JustineSecretary of State for International Development
NLDHalberstadt, VictorProfessor of Economics, Leiden University
USAHockfield, SusanPresident Emerita, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
NORHøegh, Leif O.Chairman, Höegh Autoliners AS
NORHøegh, WestyeSenior Advisor, Höegh Autoliners AS
USAHoffman, ReidCo-Founder and Executive Chairman, LinkedIn
CHNHuang, YipingProfessor of Economics, National School of Development, Peking University
USAJackson, Shirley AnnPresident, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
USAJacobs, Kenneth M.Chairman and CEO, Lazard
USAJohnson, James A.Chairman, Johnson Capital Partners
USAKarp, AlexCEO, Palantir Technologies
USAKatz, Bruce J.Vice President and Co-Director, Metropolitan Policy Program, The Brookings Institution
CANKenney, Jason T.Minister of Employment and Social Development
GBRKerr, JohnDeputy Chairman, Scottish Power
USAKissinger, Henry A.Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
USAKleinfeld, KlausChairman and CEO, Alcoa
TURKoç, MustafaChairman, Koç Holding A.S.
DNKKragh, SteffenPresident and CEO, Egmont
USAKravis, Henry R.Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
USAKravis, Marie-JoséeSenior Fellow and Vice Chair, Hudson Institute
CHEKudelski, AndréChairman and CEO, Kudelski Group
INTLagarde, ChristineManaging Director, International Monetary Fund
BELLeysen, ThomasChairman of the Board of Directors, KBC Group
USALi, ChengDirector, John L.Thornton China Center,The Brookings Institution
SWELifvendahl, TovePolitical Editor in Chief, Svenska Dagbladet
CHNLiu, HeMinister, Office of the Central Leading Group on Financial and Economic Affairs
PRTMacedo, PauloMinister of Health
FRAMacron, EmmanuelDeputy Secretary General of the Presidency
ITAMaggioni, MonicaEditor-in-Chief, Rainews24, RAI TV
GBRMandelson, PeterChairman, Global Counsel LLP
USAMcAfee, AndrewPrincipal Research Scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
PRTMedeiros, Inês deMember of Parliament, Socialist Party
GBRMicklethwait, JohnEditor-in-Chief, The Economist
GRCMitsotaki, AlexandraChair, ActionAid Hellas
ITAMonti, MarioSenator-for-life; President, Bocconi University
USAMundie, Craig J.Senior Advisor to the CEO, Microsoft Corporation
CANMunroe-Blum, HeatherProfessor of Medicine and Principal (President) Emerita, McGill University
USAMurray, Charles A.W.H. Brady Scholar, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
NLDNetherlands, H.R.H. Princess Beatrix of the
ESPNin Génova, Juan MaríaDeputy Chairman and CEO, CaixaBank
FRANougayrède, NatalieFormer Director and Executive Editor, Le Monde
DNKOlesen, Søren-PeterProfessor; Member of the Board of Directors, The Carlsberg Foundation
FINOllila, JormaChairman, Royal Dutch Shell, plc; Chairman, Outokumpu Plc
TUROran, UmutDeputy Chairman, Republican People’s Party (CHP)
GBROsborne, GeorgeChancellor of the Exchequer
FRAPellerin, FleurState Secretary for Foreign Trade
USAPerle, Richard N.Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
USAPetraeus, David H.Chairman, KKR Global Institute
CANPoloz, Stephen S.Governor, Bank of Canada
INTRasmussen, Anders FoghSecretary General, NATO
DNKRasmussen, Jørgen HunoChairman of the Board of Trustees, The Lundbeck Foundation
INTReding, VivianeVice President and Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, European Commission
USAReed, KasimMayor of Atlanta
CANReisman, Heather M.Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.
NORReiten, EivindChairman, Klaveness Marine Holding AS
DEURöttgen, NorbertChairman, Foreign Affairs Committee, German Bundestag
USARubin, Robert E.Co-Chair, Council on Foreign Relations; Former Secretary of the Treasury
USARumer, EugeneSenior Associate and Director, Russia and Eurasia Program, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
NORRynning-Tønnesen, ChristianPresident and CEO, Statkraft AS
NLDSamsom, Diederik M.Parliamentary Leader PvdA (Labour Party)
GBRSawers, JohnChief, Secret Intelligence Service
NLDScheffer, Paul J.Author; Professor of European Studies, Tilburg University
NLDSchippers, EdithMinister of Health, Welfare and Sport
USASchmidt, Eric E.Executive Chairman, Google Inc.
AUTScholten, RudolfCEO, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG
USAShih, ClaraCEO and Founder, Hearsay Social
FINSiilasmaa, Risto K.Chairman of the Board of Directors and Interim CEO, Nokia Corporation
ESPSpain, H.M. the Queen of
USASpence, A. MichaelProfessor of Economics, New York University
FINStadigh, KariPresident and CEO, Sampo plc
USASummers, Lawrence H.Charles W. Eliot University Professor, Harvard University
IRLSutherland, Peter D.Chairman, Goldman Sachs International; UN Special Representative for Migration
SWESvanberg, Carl-HenricChairman, Volvo AB and BP plc
TURTaftalı, A. ÜmitMember of the Board, Suna and Inan Kiraç Foundation
USAThiel, Peter A.President, Thiel Capital
DNKTopsøe, HenrikChairman, Haldor Topsøe A/S
GRCTsoukalis, LoukasPresident, Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy
NORUlltveit-Moe, JensFounder and CEO, Umoe AS
INTÜzümcü, AhmetDirector-General, Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
CHEVasella, Daniel L.Honorary Chairman, Novartis International
DNKVestager, MargretheDeputy Prime Minister and Minister for Economic Affairs and the Interior
FINWahlroos, BjörnChairman, Sampo plc
SWEWallenberg, JacobChairman, Investor AB
SWEWallenberg, MarcusChairman of the Board of Directors, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB
USAWarsh, Kevin M.Distinguished Visiting Fellow and Lecturer, Stanford University
GBRWolf, Martin H.Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial Times
USAWolfensohn, James D.Chairman and CEO, Wolfensohn and Company
NLDZalm, GerritChairman of the Managing Board, ABN-AMRO Bank N.V.
GRCZanias, GeorgeChairman of the Board, National Bank of Greece
USAZoellick, Robert B.Chairman, Board of International Advisors, The Goldman Sachs Group

Would you like to know how you can defeat Ebola and the Depopulation Agenda?

Defeating any viral attack and scaremongering is easy once you know the ultimate secret they’ve been keeping. Find out more about it here

Comments... Please Be Respectful!

Hardcore News Is Brought To You By...

Bookmarks

Facebook  MySpace  Twitter  Digg  Delicious  Stumbleupon  Google Bookmarks  RSS Feed