Sunday, May 25, 2014

You cannot how deep and how wide the Conspiracy to elect Obama goes.

PATRIOT FRIENDS!

You cannot how deep and how wide the Conspiracy to elect Obama goes. He did not do this all by himself. The depth is breathtaking when you do the research!!




*** READ THIS****

then share the information!!

Justia.com deliberately aid Barack Obama in 2008 by helping to hide the one legal case that might prevent him from legally qualifying for the presidency?

 
On October 20, 2011, New Jersey attorney Leo Donofrio accused online legal research behemoth Justia.com of surgically redacting important information from their publication of 25 U.S. Supreme Court opinions which cite Minor v. Happersett, an 1874 decision which arguably contains language that appears to disqualify anyone from presidential eligibility who wasn't born in the country to parents who were citizens.  According to the decision in Happersett:
At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.  (Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167 [1874])
Justia is a Google Mini-powered website which has singled itself out as one of the most comprehensive and easy-to-search legal sites on the internet.  Other legal resources such as Lexis can cost as much as $5,000 a month for a subscription, and it's impossible to hyperlink to cases which include copyrighted headnotes and analysis.  This is why powerful law firms such as Perkins Coie (where former Obama White House Counsel Bob Bauer practices law) have cited Justia's pages.
The Wayback Machine, run by InternetArchive.Org, is the means by which the changes made at Justia were documented over time.  Among the first responses from Justia regarding this controversy was to block its Supreme Court Server from being viewed by the Wayback Machine.
Click the following link for an image documenting the pattern of changes made to one of those 25 cases, Luria v. U.S., 231 U.S. 9 (1913).  Notice that the case name "Minor v. Happersett" has been removed, minimizing the case searchability.
The cover-up simply reeks.  While Justia owner Tim Stanley told CNET that there were more cases which had also been "mangled," there is no way to identify how much bogus law was published by Justia over the three-year period in question.  Minor v. Happersett simply disappeared from cases which cited it, minimizing its footprint on the internet at a critical juncture in history -- the election of 2008.
McCarthy v. Briscoe, 429 U.S. 1317 (1976)
On Nov. 3, 2008, one day before the election, Donofrio petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the ballots in New Jersey from being used the next day in the case Donofrio v. Wells, claiming that the eligibility of both Obama and McCain had not been verified by the NJ secretary of State as required by law.
In his research, Donofrio had found a reference to McCarthy v. Briscoe, 429 U.S. 1317 (1976), an important precedent which allows the Supreme Court -- or even one justice acting alone if an emergency stay is requested -- to order a secretary of state to insert a name on the ballot.  The holding of the case implies a reciprocal power to remove names from ballots for the several secretaries of State, as well as the U.S. Supreme Court.
Back in '08, Donofrio couldn't find the in chambers decision anywhere online.  Forced to go old-school, he procured it from a brick-and-mortar law library.  But to this day, McCarthy v. Briscoe remains elusive at Justia.  If you look in their "Volume" database and click "429," all of the in chambers opinions are mysteriously absent. 
In chambers opinions generally begin on pg. 1,301, but not every official volume has them.  For example, Volume 428 has no in chambers opinions, but 429, 434, and 439 do.  Justia's database for Volumes 434 and 439 do exhibit the in chambers opinions, but Volume 429 has them scrubbed.
If you search Justia's Cases & Opinions by Year in 1976, McCarthy v. Briscoe is listed.  There are two cases, an insignificant one-page opinion at page 1,316, followed by the relevant decision on pg. 1,317.  There are links to the preview as well as "Full Text."  However, all of the links are broken, leading back to Justia's front page.
Additionally, Justia's publication of a following 1977 5th Circuit case, 553 F.2d 1005, includes a hyperlink back to 429 U.S. 1317, and that link is also mysteriously broken.
It would be instructive to track the timeline of changes in the Wayback Machine, but Justia is steadfastly preventing that transparency.  Furthermore, if Justia continues its previous pattern, the links (eg: http://supreme.justia.com/us/429/1317/) will be restored upon publication of this article.  Take your screenshots now.

With numerous state-level challenges being prepared by opponents of Obama's eligibility for 2012, McCarthy v. Briscoe will be a required citation.  That it continues to be unavailable at Justia seriously calls into question Stanley's contention that the cases on Justia's servers were mangled by an innocent coding error.
This claim of innocent technical error was debunked by Dr. David Hansen, a Ph.D. in computer science.  McCarthy v. Briscoe, 429 U.S. 1317 (1976) at Justia shows a completely different pattern of information removal from what could be explained away by a single coding error which erased case names.
The removal of prior versions of cases from the Wayback Machine by Justia amounts to nothing less than supreme hypocrisy considering Stanley's high stature as a leading light championing transparency of legal information for the public.  
Use at your own risk
Justia in 2008 tangled with the State of Oregon when it downloaded and republished the State Statutes without either informing the state or gaining its permission, in violation of copyright law.  Dexter Johnson, the head of the Office of Oregon State Legislative Counsel Committee reported that the Committee received information that the State Statutes were available at a website other than the state.  Upon investigation, the Committee ultimately decided not to pursue legal action against Justia for copyright violation; instead, "the committee decided to waive its copyright on the Oregon Revised Statutes going forward," said Johnson in a phone interview.
It is left to a user of Justia to verify the information to be found within its pages, despite a disclaimer of "Full Text of Case" on its pages.  Upon inquiry with the U.S. Supreme Court, Patricia McCabe Estrada, deputy public information officer of the U.S. Supreme Court, responded that "the official opinions of the Supreme Court are posted on the Court's Website and we don't generally monitor other sites." 
Johnson says Oregon also does not have a monitoring policy in place.  When asked how a person using Justia's services would know if he were receiving accurate information or not, Johnson replied:
The only way, it seems to me, would be to compare that with what's on the legislature's website. In which case you might as well go directly to the legislature's website. It's one of the reasons why we had originally suggested that they have their website simply point in the direction of our own.
Justia publishes SCOTUS cases with the positive affirmation "Full Text of Case."  Clearly this was not done with regards to the specific opinions it redacted and covered up.  Whether a violation of law or not, various non-profit agencies, students, law firms, and private researchers who relied upon Justia's services remain in the dark, unable to determine if their research materials were altered by Justia, as the company has released neither what it redacted nor in what cases.  Without an effective means of verifying accuracy, Justia's transparency and credibility are questionable.
Public.Resource.Org
It turns out that Justia received additional help from their close counterpart in the open government information movement, Public.Resource.Org (PRO), founded and run by Carl Malamud.  Malamud was also the chief technology officer for The Center for American Progress, a progressive think-tank funded in part by none other than George Soros.  Tim Stanley is on the Board of Trustees at Public.Resource.Org, and Justia is PRO's top benefactor.  Stanley is also a co-convenor of Malamud's Law.gov organization, which, despite appearances, is not a government entity. 
PRO makes available a huge database of court cases to other organizations such as the Cornell Legal Institute, which has now been dragged into the Justia mess through a case that cements Minor v. Happersett as defining "Natural Born Citizen."  Ex Parte: Lockwood  states:
In Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, this court held that the word 'citizen' is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation, and, in that sense, women, if born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always been considered citizens of the United States, as much so before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution as since[.]"  (Emphasis added.)
However, at Cornell, the opinion is cut off right after "Minor v.".  Someone searching for "Minor v. Happersett" will be detoured from this case and its holding in support of Minor's precedence.  Cornell's version of Ex Parte: Lockwood is completely mangled.  Yet Lockwood helps prove that the decision in Minor created a legal definition of "Natural Born Citizen," something the national narrative states that no Supreme Court Case has ever done, in part because Minor's importance was effectively obscured.
There has been a deliberate, targeted effort to minimize if not erase the legal importance of Minor v. Happersett in defining the term "Natural Born Citizen."  Justia and PRO champion freedom of information yet at the same time hypocritically redacted the law to suit a political goal.  Justia and Tim Stanley butchered these cases and, when caught, removed Wayback Machine's access to Justia's entire Supreme Court server.  The only thing hidden now is the evidence of Justia's deliberate scrubbing, as the cases are available in the public domain.
Tim Stanley has not returned messages asking for comment on this story at time of publication.  Sometime last week, Justia added a disclaimer at the bottom of its SCOTUS case texts:
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.
The disclaimer speaks volumes about the credibility and accuracy of Justia.com.


LOOK FOLKS...

BICKERING ON LINE IS NOT GOING TO HELP US GET OUR COUNTRY BACK...

WE DO NOT HAVE THESE RESOURCES..

BUT WE HAVE THE NUMBERS TO REVOLT!

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

OBAMACARE.. OBAMA LIAR... OBAMA CHEAT OBAMA FRAUD


The full scale of the ObamaCare launch disaster is revealed

The full scale of the ObamaCare launch disaster is revealedRemember back in the old days, when we had an inquisitive media filled with “reporters” who would do whatever it took to get the real facts of a story, especially if they thought powerful officials might be lying to the American people?  We’ll probably get such an environment back, if a Republican becomes President in 2016.  But ever since Barack Obama was elected, the media has served more as a volunteer ignorance militia, blindly disseminating whatever talking points the Administration gives them with very little challenge.  When vital information is withheld from the American people, Obama’s palace-guard media shrugs and says, “Hey, what are you gonna do?”
Well, one thing you can do is file Freedom of Information Act requests, and if the Obama Administration illegally refuses to respond, you can file FOIA lawsuits.  Only independent watchdog groups do that sort of digging now.  The “mainstream media” stirs in its easy chairs, roused from fond nappy-time dreams of how much fun they had at the second Obama inaugural, and harrumphs in confusion as each new nugget of long-buried truth is excavated by these outsiders.  It’s nothing short of astonishing that none of the big FOIA bombshells are coming from our huge, well-staffed, highly funded media organizations.  And they’re not exactly eager to pump the headlines full of astonishing truth, even when someone else drops it into their laps.
Judicial Watch, which did investigative work the mainstream media willfully refused to do on the Benghazi and IRS scandals, just emerged from the Obama Temple of Doom with yet another long-lost treasure of hard information: a 106-page document from the Department of Health and Human Services, revealing the breathtaking scope of the ObamaCare launch disaster.  In accordance with standard Obama scandal protocols, all of this information was kept from the public until a few crucial news cycles had rolled past.


Let us note, as too much reporting on these latter-day revelations fails to do, that this HHS document was procured with a lawsuit, not a Freedom of Information Act “request.”  Judicial Watch made such a request in October 2013, but the Obama Administration illegally refused to comply, prompting the watchdog group to follow up with court action in late November.
The people who call themselves “reporters” will probably relegate this new document to Page A-26 and claim it’s all “old news.”  The important thing to remember is that they refused to report it, or even push hard for the information, back when it was piping-hot news, and might have caused public anger to grow incandescently hot.  Obama’s political team understands that every scandal grows less damaging over time, if you have a friendly media that doesn’t make a big deal about the outrageous stonewalling necessary to drag out damaging revelations.
One of the amazing facts in this HHS document was already revealed long after it would have provoked a firestorm of national outrage: only one ObamaCare enrollment was received on the first day of history’s most expensive website launch.  But the other details unearthed by Judicial Watch paint a portrait of staggering incompetence and mendacity:
  • On October 1, there were 43,208 accounts created and 1 enrollment. (Page 49)
  • As of October 31, 2013, there were 1,319,425 accounts created nationwide – but only 30,512 actual enrollments in Obamacare. (Page 19)
  • Official figures contained in the HHS report provide conflicting figures as to the number of enrollments. FFM [Federally Facilitated Marketplace] statistics show 23,259 cumulative to-date applications submitted as of 10/2/13 and 286 completed plan selections. Earlier numbers show 356 enrollments created as of 7pm on 10/2/13 that were completed with Form 834s sent. (Pages 91-92)
  • An October 2, 2013, email from HHS Special Assistant Marianne Bowen indicated serious problems with congressional enrollments: “The Congressional issue (68 attempts for Direct enrollment) was an issue stemming from incomplete applications being sent through (started, not finished, sent anyway) and the way the issuers are assigning unique numbers. Turns out there were only 4 complete Direct Enrollment applications that went through, the other 64 were not complete.” (Page 93) [The U.S. Congress has approximately 24,000 professional staffers.]
  • On October 2, 2013, the Obamacare website had 70,000 page views but only 5,000 were unique visitors, and 48% of registrations failed. The large number of page views may have been the result of visitors repeatedly hitting the “refresh” button due to long waiting times. (Page 106)
It cannot be stressed enough that all of this information was kept from the American people, for no good reason.  ObamaCare isn’t some national-security project whose failure would jeopardize public safety, if it became known to America’s enemies.  Every one of these developments should have been forthrightly admitted to the public immediately.  There is no justification for the Obama Administration keeping us in the dark “for our own good,” to prevent angry voters from acting against the wishes of their benevolent masters in the next election.
Corporatist government-business projects like ObamaCare should be held to far higher standards of accountability and transparency than purely private-sector enterprises, because corporations are ultimately responsible to shareholders, survive only through sustainable business models, and have government regulators breathing down their necks.  (And as we saw from the GM recall debacle, when the government becomes senior partner in a corporation, those regulators grow notably less enthusiastic.)  There’s no question ObamaCare would be dead and gone if it were a private business; CEO Barack Obama would spend the rest of life in court, or jail, fending off lawsuits from defrauded customers.  A document such as the one Judicial Watch unearthed would become prized evidence at the messy ObamaCare Inc. bankruptcy hearings.
But instead, we get far less transparency and accountability when Big Government and Big Business get together to unleash their mutant progeny upon the population.  We get spokespeople and their willing media enablers lying about how everything is going fine, when it clearly isn’t.  The people who preside over unspeakable disasters are allowed to retire gracefully, with thanks for all their hard work.  Top officials cite their lack of awareness of critical problems as a defense against being held responsible for failure.
And even when the media knows that everything they’ve been instructed to relay to us about ObamaCare was a lie, they grant default credibility to the next set of fairy tales, such as the lingering mystery of just how many of the reported ObamaCare “enrollments” are bogus – a question Judicial Watch asks in their press release:
On April 17, 2014, President Obama announced that eight million people had signed up for health insurance on Affordable Healthcare Act exchanges. That figure, however, may be substantially over-inflated. According to testimony in May by the America’s Health Insurance Plans association before the House Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Oversight, “Because of the challenges that surfaced with the launch of the Exchanges in October 2013, some consumers were advised to create a new account and enroll again. As a result, insurers have many duplicate enrollments in their system for which they never received any payment.”
“Once again, Judicial Watch is able to get information through FOIA that no one else had gotten – the specifics about the unmitigated failure of the Obamacare healthcare.gov collapse,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Obama administration tried to cover this up, Congress failed to follow through, but we managed to get the truth about the $667 billion Obamacare website.  Imagine what would have happened to Obamacare if the American people knew only one person was able to enroll on its first day?  What other Obamacare failures is President Obama hiding?”
We’re forced to rely on industry analysts reading tea leaves to guess at the percentage of those 8 million claimed “enrollments” that turn out to be invalid due to non-payment, distorted data, or duplicate data entry – twenty percent?  Thirty?  Forty?  But meanwhile, for a few precious news cycles, the President got to tout an 8 million figure the media knows is wrong, and they let it pass without much in the way of challenge… never mind the flinty-eyed skepticism they should be displaying, coupled with shouted demands for the release of hard data.
ObamaCare is an enduring example of Big Government incompetence and deception, mirrored precisely in the currently exploding VA scandal, which gives Americans a very accurate forecast of what our ultimate, hellish single-payer socialized future will look like.  Your future under the combined domination of Big Government and Big Business will be a series of expensive frauds.  Truth will be treated like a radioactive isotope that must be kept buried until its political half-life has expired.  And if you grow angry when the facts are finally revealed, mainstream media “reporters” will be standing by to insult you for obsessing over old news.
Update: The expanding Serco scandal is another example of the mainstream media sleeping through bad news for ObamaCare.  Serco is a contractor that was caught by local media paying a huge staff of employees at an ObamaCare “processing center” to do nothing all day.  Another such office has been uncovered in Arkansas… by another Missouri news station.  Apparently none of our vaunted mainstream media “reporters” could be bothered to follow upon a story of outrageous taxpayer money wasted in the name of President Boyfriend’s “signature achievement,” so Missouri reporters went to Arkansas to continue the investigation.
Update: Have document requests been filed with the Obama Administration by the local reporters investigating the Serco scandal mentioned above?  Why, yes, they have.  And maybe one day, six months or a year from now, after a couple of lawsuits, we might finally get to see those documents.  But for right now, the usual stonewall is in effect, as the high and mighty mainstream press slumbers on.

Sunday, May 18, 2014

WIRELESS CHAT ROOMS. START TESTING THIS OUT IN YOUR AREA. PATRIOTS THIS APP COULD LET US CONTACT EACH OTHER WHEN OBAMA USES THE INTERNET "KILL SWITCH" AGAINST THE REVOLUTION!

The app that lets you chat WITHOUT an internet or phone connection: FireChat uses hidden iOS feature to relay messages:
THIS APP COULD LET US CONTACT EACH OTHER WHEN OBAMA USES THE INTERNET "KILL SWITCH"

The FireChat app that was developed by Open Garden. Within the app there are a series of 'chatrooms' including Everyone and Nearby. The former will search for all users, while the Nearby option applies to people within Bluetooth and Wi-Fi range who are also using the app
  • The iOS 7 feature is called Multipeer Connectivity Framework (MCF)
  • It creates what's called a wireless mesh, or peer-to-peer, network
  • Instead of sending messages using a mobile signal, the free app creates its own network where each mobile on it becomes a 'node'
  • This means people in close proximity can message other nodes
  • Messages are also sent over long distance by relaying data from one node to another anonymously

Buried within the settings of Apple’s iOS 7 is a feature that could revolutionise how we communicate.

Called the Multipeer Connectivity Framework (MCF), it lets you send messages and photos even when a person has no signal. 

Now a group of developers has created a free iPhone app called FireChat that takes advantage of this feature - and it even works over long distances.

The FireChat app was developed by the crowdsourced firm Open Garden. When a user opens the app, they can pick a screen name to start sending messages. 
Within the app there are 'chatrooms' with 'Everyone' and 'Nearby' options.
The former will search for all users, while the latter option applies to people within Bluetooth and Wi-Fi range who are also using the app.
This is particularly useful when on a plane, or the underground. It can also be used to save money on data plans, for example.
Apple added MCF to its iOS 7 software last year. 

It creates what is called a wireless mesh network that connects phones to each other.
 
In 'Nearby' mode, instead of sending messages using a mobile or data signal, the feature lets users send messages to people in close proximity that are in Bluetooth or Wi-Fi Direct range - up to around 30 feet (9 metres).
It does this by creating a localised network in which each phone becomes a node, and the data is passed between nodes.
Apple uses the framework for its AirDrop feature, for example, which makes it easy to send files and data to other connected iPhone users.
It takes advantage of the same iOS 7 connectivity tool Apple uses for its AirDrop feature, pictured
The FireChat app, pictured  was developed by Open Garden. In the app there are 'chatrooms' including Everyone and Nearby. The former searches for all users, while the latter applies to people within Bluetooth and Wi-Fi range. It takes advantage of the same iOS 7 tool Apple uses for its AirDrop feature, pictured right

WHAT IS MULTIPEER CONNECTIVITY?

Apple added Multipeer Connectivity Framework (MCF) to its iOS 7 software last year.
It creates what’s called a wireless mesh network that connects phones to each other.
Instead of sending messages using mobile or data signal, the features lets users send messages to people in close proximity that are in Bluetooth or Wi-Fi Direct range - up to around 30 feet (9 metres).
It does this by creating a localised network in which each phone becomes a node and the data is passed between nodes.
Apple uses the framework for its AirDrop feature, for example, which makes it easy to send files and data to other connected iPhone users.
These messages are sent securely, so the individual nodes can’t read them.
Users can also send messages anonymously to avoid snooping, for example, because data is sent from app usernames, as opposed to mobile numbers.
Elsewhere, because the feature doesn’t use an internet connection, it can’t be infiltrated by hackers.
The 'Everyone' Setting allows people to send information further however.
It does this by bringing all its nodes onto one network and relaying messages from one node to another until it reaches the final recipient.
It is not known whether there is a maximum distance the app will work within, and in theory it will work wherever there are nodes, but MailOnline has contacted the company to find out more.
The distance a message can be sent is probably dependent on whether a given region has the nodes needed to relay the messages.
Nodes are simply a vehicle for passing data along a network. On a traditional internet network any device that’s connected to the network is also called a node.
For example, if a network has a phone, tablet, two computers and a printer connected to it there are five nodes on the network.
Each of these devices have a network address which is used to uniquely identify each one. This helps keep track of where data is being transferred to and from on the network.
There is an Android version of the mesh networking feature, developed by Open Garden, but it is not a chat app and is instead used for file sharing.

Description( Click here for the link: https://itunes.apple.com/app/id719829352?mt=8 )

FireChat introduces a new way to chat: "off-the-grid".
Now you can chat with people around you - even if there is no Internet connection or mobile phone coverage. It just works and it’s free.

Could social networks be like parties?

As a step in this direction, the new FireChat introduces a new type of communication: "firechats". These are live, fast-paced, and anonymous group discussions. You can join firechats or move easily from one to another, just as you might when attending a party.

And you can also create your own firechats, about the topics, people or communities that interest you - whether it's the NY Yankees, UC San Diego, Game of Thrones, League of Legends or Italian food.

Last but not least, firechats work even if no connection to the Internet or cellular phone coverage is available.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014

THE BOKO HARAM - BENGHAZI CONNECTION WITH THER OBAMA CABAL.. READ AND SHARE!!

THIS IS HOW THE OUSTING OF KHADAFI, ARMING THE LIBYAN REBELS, THE BENGHAZI ATTACK, THE SMUGGLING OF ARMS OUT OF LIBYA TO ARM SYRIAN REBELS AND OTHER AL QAEDA GROUPS..

GAVE BOKO HARAM THE WEAPONS TO WAGE ISLAMIC JIHAD TODAY!
Since 2010, Boko Haram Islamists have perpetrated drive-by shootings and suicide bombings that have killed 1,548 people. Boko Haram, which means "Western education is sacrilege," has said it wants its imprisoned Jihadi Islamists released and for the current Nigerian government to institute Sharia law throughout the nation.

 READ ON...
( For more details on the Benghazi Story click here : http://john-gaultier.blogspot.com/2013/05/president-obama-former-secretary-of.html)

When the revolt first broke out against Libyan dictator Muamar Gadhafi in March, 2011, the Obama administration determined to remove him from power. Not because it was necessary, because he’d long passed his “sell-by” date as an evil mastermind, but because it could. Unlike the peaceful decamping of the dictators in Tunisia and Egypt, this would be a test bed on how to overthrow a dictator on the cheap.
The first problem was arming the rebels. Libya was under a UN arms embargo and any movement of arms into Libya would be illegal if you really care about such flummery.

Arming the Libyan Rebels

We know the Obama administration encouraged France, Italy, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar to arm the rebels. The Egyptians did so from their own volition because they shared a common ideology with the rebels:  a particularly violent form of islamofascism.
We know that the idea of the US arming the Libyan rebels was hotly debated inside the administration with the State Department, under Hillary Clinton, seemingly the most enchanted with the idea of arms trafficking:

-The Obama administration is engaged in a fierce debate over whether to supply weapons to the rebels in Libya, senior officials said on Tuesday, with some fearful that providing arms would deepen American involvement in a civil war and that some fighters may have links to Al Qaeda.
The debate has drawn in the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon, these officials said, and has prompted an urgent call for intelligence about a ragtag band of rebels who are waging a town-by-town battle against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, from a base in eastern Libya long suspected of supplying terrorist recruits

While Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the administration had not yet decided whether to actually transfer arms, she reiterated that the United States had a right to do so, despite an arms embargo on Libya, because of the United Nations Security Council’s broad resolution authorizing military action to protect civilians.

Gene A. Cretz, the American ambassador to Libya, said last week that he was impressed by the democratic instincts of the opposition leaders and that he did not believe that they were dominated by extremists. But he acknowledged that there was no way to know if they were “100 percent kosher, so to speak.”
We also know that John McCain (Songbird McCain  http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2013/06/22/songbird-john-mccain-made-more-than-32-communist-videos-against-united-states/ ) was in favor of arming the rebels,
Eventually, covert aid was authorized for the Libyan rebels and though we have no direct evidence of US running arms we know that the Obama's CIA had an on the ground presence. We know Obama was not opposed to the idea of running arms to the rebels.

Obama said the U.S. had not ruled out providing military hardware to rebels.
‘It’s fair to say that if we wanted to get weapons into Libya, we probably could. We’re looking at all our options at this point,’ the President told ABC News anchor Diane Sawyer.
And we know that $200 million worth of small arms was shipped by an American arms dealer to Qatar with an export license granted by the US government.

The case of Marc Turi, the American arms merchant who had sought to provide weapons to Libya, demonstrates other challenges the United States faced in dealing with Libya. A dealer who lives in both Arizona and Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, Mr. Turi sells small arms to buyers in the Middle East and Africa, relying primarily on suppliers of Russian-designed weapons in Eastern Europe.
In March 2011, just as the Libyan civil war was intensifying, Mr. Turi realized that Libya could be a lucrative new market, and applied to the State Department for a license to provide weapons to the rebels there, according to e-mails and other documents he has provided. (American citizens are required to obtain United States approval for any international arms sales.)
He also e-mailed J. Christopher Stevens, then the special representative to the Libyan rebel alliance. The diplomat said he would “share” Mr. Turi’s proposal with colleagues in Washington, according to e-mails provided by Mr. Turi. Mr. Stevens, who became the United States ambassador to Libya, was one of the four Americans killed in the Benghazi attack on Sept. 11.
Mr. Turi’s application for a license was rejected in late March 2011. Undeterred, he applied again, this time stating only that he planned to ship arms worth more than $200 million to Qatar. In May 2011, his application was approved. Mr. Turi, in an interview, said that his intent was to get weapons to Qatar and that what “the U.S. government and Qatar allowed from there was between them.”
When you read news coverage of the period (set your Google search dates for the period February 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011) you get the feeling that the policy consensus was that running guns to the Libyan rebels had some risks but the benefits far outweighed those risks. You find no major players writing or speaking against the idea and, curiously, coverage of the debate disappears within a week of the approval of covert aid to Libya.

Letting the Arms Get Away

To no one’s great surprise outside the White House, the weapons we directly or indirectly provided to the Libyan rebels, now known to be largely al Qaeda, slipped from western control.

The Obama administration secretly gave its blessing to arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar last year, but American officials later grew alarmed as evidence grew that Qatar was turning some of the weapons over to Islamic militants, according to United States officials and foreign diplomats.
We don’t know what “some” means, but as much as $500 million worth of foreign weapons may have found their way into al Qaeda hands in Libya.

Boko Haram

Boko Haram has been in the news recently both because of their savage attacks in Nigeria, such as the one that resulted in over 240 school girls kidnapped and Michelle Obama beclowning herself with a Twitter hashtag picture.
boko haram michelle,
If you look at the timeline of Boko Haram attacks, you are struck by how they coincide with the arming of the Libyan rebels and how they increase in ferocity following the death of Gaddafi. That is because those arms have made their way from Libya to Nigeria via Boko Haram’s al Qaeda connection.

Boko Haram, under the leadership of fiery, gun-toting militant Abubakar Shekau, is thought to be getting closer to achieving its dream of creating some kind of Islamic rule in the lawless areas around Lake Chad, where even the police have fled.
“They are now holding territory,” Kole Shettima, chairman of the Centre for Democracy and Development, said. “The next step is to create institutions: justice, social services,” as Malian Islamists did before the French forced them out of its cities.
The Bama attack showed their substantial firepower, including machine guns, large numbers of rocket propelled grenades (RPGs) and pick-up trucks mounted with anti-aircraft guns, a sign the weapons flood from the Libyan war that helped rebels seize parts of Mali last year has reached Nigeria, officials say.
Oddly enough, one of the reasons Glen Doherty, who was killed in the phony-scandal on our Benghazi consulate, was in Libya was to try to regain control of more sophisticated weapons, such as man-portable air defense systems, that were in circulation.
The US participation in the overthrow of Gaddafi was ill advised. For no greater reason than to make a political point, the Obama administration encouraged allies to arm al Qaeda fighters in Libya and evidence indicates that after March 2011 we were arming them directly. The result was that Libya became an armed camp and al Qaeda safe haven.
A foreseeable consequence of this policy was al Qaeda in Libya becoming a supplier of arms to its affiliates in Africa. As a result, the victory on the cheap in Libya is substantially destabilizing the northern rim of Sub-Saharan Africa.
The Obama administration has sown the wind by its benighted policy in Libya, now the resulting whirlwind is being reaped in Nigeria.

*********************************
ITS TIME TO STOP OBAMA AND HIS CABAL.... EMPOWERING ISLAMISTS AND JIHADIS AROUND THE WORLD!

REVOLUTION NOW AMERICA !!

Friday, May 9, 2014

A Pope who was "selected" by the Socialist Cabal that used the NSA Evesdropping to Blackmail the last Pope to resign... Now makes his master directed play!!

The New Socialist Pope's Wealth Redistribution exposes his true colors.

 His "Economic Plan" is pure unadulterated Socialist Bullshit hidden behind a curtain of incense and myrrh and smoke and mirrors.Pope Francis passes by a tapestry depicting late Pope John Paul II as he leaves at the end of his weekly general audience at the Vatican on April 30,...

Pope Francis demands wealth redistribution. He forgets St. John Paul's recognition of the "positive role of business, the market, private property" as "the model which ought to be proposed" for the Third World.

Addressing U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and other officials on Friday, the first supreme pontiff from Latin America called for "the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state."
Excuse the irreverence, but his holiness may be forgetting the hundreds of millions of souls whose lives have been improved, lengthened, even saved by maximizing capitalism and minimizing government.
As Steve Forbes points out, "capitalism is more moral than any and all alternatives," producing over the last 300 years "more advances — in incomes, standard of living, social mobility and longevity — than in all the previous centuries put together."
George Gilder, in "Wealth and Poverty," often referred to as the Bible of the Reagan White House, observed: "Capitalism begins with giving. Not through greed, avarice or even self-love can one expect the rewards of commerce, but from a spirit closely akin to altruism, a regard for the needs of others. ... Not taking and consuming, but giving, risking and creating are the characteristic roles of the capitalist."
Calls for government to rectify "inequality" are based on a fallible assumption: that wealth is finite, not created by free human beings. With statism rising in Russia and China, and the New Deal entrenched in America, Ludwig von Mises in 1949 posed the choice between capitalism and socialism as choosing "between social cooperation and the disintegration of society."
Von Mises and other champions of the free market weren't foes of Christian charity. "We may fully endorse the religious and ethical precepts that declare it to be man's duty to assist his unlucky brethren whom nature has doomed," he wrote. The question is "what methods should be resorted to" in doing that duty. If government is in charge, "the discretion of bureaucrats is substituted for the discretion of people whom an inner voice drives to acts of charity."
That inevitably means massive waste, corruption and other unintended negative consequences.
Pope John Paul II, canonized as a saint by Pope Francis just last month, addressed capitalism's morality in 1991, asking if "capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society" and "the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?"
His conclusion: If capitalism "recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative" — although "market economy" or "free economy" might be a more accurate name than capitalism.
Pope Francis' fans extol his open-mindedness. We hope he'll open the great books by von Mises, Adam Smith, Friedrich von Hayek, Milton Friedman and others that make the powerful moral case for free markets.

Pope Francis has spent a year on the Throne of Peter. In that time, his modest style and high-minded ideals have ignited a new optimism and fervor among Roman Catholics, including those who left because of disagreements with some of its teachings.

Francis has gone out of his way to voice support for the world’s poorest citizens, rightly noting that their plight is too often ignored or brushed aside. 

Until this week, his statements have called for voluntary action by wealthier countries and individuals as the right way to relieve economic inequality. He appealed to our better selves, and in so doing, made us all ask if we could be kinder and more generous. The answer, of course, is yes.

On Friday, however, Francis chose a meeting with – of all people -- officials of the United Nations to endorse what he called “the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state, as well as indispensable cooperation between the private sector and civil society.”

By appearing to sanction what amounts to forced redistribution, Francis grievously exceeded his authority and became what amounts to a robe-wearing politician.
By appearing to sanction what amounts to forced redistribution, Francis grievously exceeded his authority and became what amounts to a robe-wearing politician. He also exposed his Church, one of the wealthiest institutions in the world, to inevitable charges of hypocrisy. And he put himself in a position of having to back up his frothy talk with ruinous action.

Let’s see: for starters, perhaps the Catholic Church and its affiliated non-profit organizations should start voluntarily paying income and real estate tax in the United States, from which it has traditionally been exempt. Yeah how about that??

There is no doubt that the addition of tax revenue from the Church would be considerable, if hard to estimate. The 17,000-plus parishes may not all measure up to architectural wonders like St. Patrick’s in New York or the newer Our Lady of the Angels in Los Angeles. But few Catholic churches have absolutely no value. What would 39.5% of all that be?

How could Francis, or his subordinates in the United States object to voluntarily turning over part of their vast revenue?

The notion of the church paying taxes is certainly not heretical. Italy – which surrounds Vatican City where the pope lives – began taxing Catholic Church property last year as a way of helping to relieve its enormous economic problems. At last check, St. Peter’s was still standing.

Further, Francis might consider selling off the artworks stored at the Vatican museum and in churches throughout the world, and the thousands upon thousands of ancient books and manuscripts in its library. 

The Pietá, for instance, should fetch a pretty penny, especially if the buyer is, say, a backer of Al Qaeda who can afford to smash it to pieces as soon as it is acquired.

The Pope is the head of the Church. He is the Vicar of Christ and is infallible on matters of doctrine.

When it comes to economics, however, Francis should stick to making suggestions for how to voluntarily reduce economic inequality and leave tax policy to the politicians.

Perhaps he can help by offering a prayer for them. God knows, they need it.



YES I SAY THE POPE SHOULD STICK TO TALKING OF GOD AND THE HEREAFTER.

Sunday, May 4, 2014

ARREST OBAMA FOR FALSE REPRESENTATION OF WHO HE IS. ARREST HIS ENABLERS TOO!

Who IS This Man? HE IS A FAKE!!



For over years now, We the People have been asking this question, “Who is this man?”  Today we are no closer to the answer than before.  In fact, we become more confused by the day.
Is his name Barack Hussein Obama II, as contended in two books arguably written by him and on a specious COLB presented to a gullible lamestream media on partisan blogs and campaign websites?  Or is his name Barack Obama Jr., as he was called in the infamous FactCheck blog defense of his British/Kenyan citizenship? Or is his name Barry Obama, as (it is claimed) he was known in school in Hawaii?   Or is his name Barry Soetoro, as school registration forms from Indonesia seem to indicate?  Or is his name Soebarkah, as his mother’s passport records seem to indicate?  (A one word name, in keeping with Indonesian tradition, because he was adopted by his stepfather.) Or is his name Barry Dunham, Steve Dunham, or the latest:  Barrack Houssein Obama II, as indicated on records from a U.S. MILITARY Court-Martial of patriotic American, LTC Lakin, who himself put his life and freedom on the line in a quest to learn the answer to this question:   WHO IS THIS MAN?
Link to the records; see for yourself:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/37124816/Court-Martial-of-LTC-Terrence-Lakin-Ruling-on-Discovery-2-Sep-2010

Why would a transcript from a U.S. government court-martial refer to the president of the United States as Barrack Houssein Obama II?  Has anyone before seen that spelling of his name?  What does this court, this judge, know that We the People do not know?  Will this man answer our question:  WHO ARE YOU?
This is an open thread.  Feel free to comment at will.  I’d like to request, also, that anyone who can, please tell us what is represented on those gold drapes that this POTUS is so frequently photographed in front of.  In addition, can anyone familiar with Muslim names, please inform us as to the possible differences in meaning between Barack versus Barrack, and Hussein versus Houssein?

UPDATE,  9/15/2010.

I forgot this alias:  Barack Abdallah Husein Obama, kindly provided to us by this Tanzanian online newspaper.
http://www.thecitizen.co.tz/magazines/32-political-platform/2708-zanzibar-could-reverse-trend-to-have-president-from-pemba.html
Second UPDATE of the day:
Baracka Hussein Abu Amama from http://www.alarabiya.net/views/2010/08/24/117453.html
They post that his mother changed  Abu Amama to Obama. Goodness gracious.  How many names do YOU have?
UPDATE 11/01/2010: We have yet another name for this person, “Wuod Sarah”, Dholuo for “the son of Sarah.”  In addition, persons who know Luo naming conventions have pointed out that his name, technically, should be Barack Hussein.  Just that.  No  Obama.
UPDATE 06/05/2011:   Lawyer Stephen Pidgeon claims that Barry’s name was changed to its current form from Barak Mounir Ubayd in British Columbia in 1982.
UPDATE 09/01/2011:  Researchers turned up an alias for Barry:  Harrison J. Bounel.  During the 2008 campaign, Obama was adopted by a Native American family (Crow) and given this name: Awe Kooda bilaxpak Kuuxshish
UPDATE 09/07/2011: h/t Kathy  and Gateway Pundit.  Gaddafi the tyrant of Libya wrote to Barry: “Our dear son, Excellency, Baraka Hussein Abu Oumama, your intervention in the name of the U.S.A. is a must, so that Nato (NATO) would withdraw finally from the Libyan affair.”  A commenter on another blog explained that Abu in Arabic means “the father of”, and Oumama refers to Obama’s daughters because it means the female children of Umama, the Arabic root of  Obama. Makes sense.  But here’s another name and it seems Gaddafi is tweaking him, doesn’t it?  What does Gaddafi know?  Strangely enough, the man who owned the home where Obama’s Uncle Omar lived when he was arrested for DUI and evading a deportation order is named Ouma.   This man also owned the home where Uncle Omar lived in 1987-1991, when the IRS placed a lien against Omar for non-payment of taxes.  So Mr. Ouma helped Omar for over twenty years. Is he kin?  Did he shorten his name to Ouma, a variation of Obama?
UPDATE: March 5, 2012:  When Obama appeared in a panel discussion with other Alinsky-lovers in 1998, his name was advertised on a poster as Senator BARAKA ObamaMinutes of a Board of Education from Paterson, NJ, where they talked about students being introduced to IL State Sen. Baraka Obama.  Now where did they get that spelling? h/t SEO.
UPDATE: April 17, 2012: Obama carved his name in cement near his school in Hawaii:  King Obama.
In a hearing before an administrative law judge, about Obama’s eligibility to be placed on the New Jersey primary ballot, Judge Jeff S. Maslin dismissed the complaint against Barak Obama (p. 7).  On the first two pages of the ruling, which seem to reprise the petitioners’ filing, Barack Obama is referred to as “the respondent” and “president”.  But which is his LEGAL name?   Does the judge know?  Is that why the judge used Barak, while the petitioners used Barack?
UPDATE: March 3, 2013: Obama apparently used the name Barack Soetoro at Columbia University, 2960 Broadway, in NYC.ARREST THIS MAN... HE IS A FRAUD!!!

SO WHAT IS HIS NAME ???
  1. Barack Hussein Obama II
  2. Barack Obama Jr.
  3. Barry Obama
  4. Barry Soetoro
  5. Soebarkah
  6. Barry Dunham
  7. Steve Dunham
  8. Barrack Houssein Obama II     (U.S. Military   – Lakin)
  9. Barack Abdallah Husein Obama  (Tanzanian newspaper)
  10. Baracka Hussein Abu Amama  (Abu Amama changed to Obama)
  11. Barack Hussein
  12. Wuod Sarah -   (Dholuo for the “Son of Sarah”)
  13. Barak Mounir Ubayd  (Stephen Pidgeon – British Columbia)
  14. Harrison J. Bounel – (Name associated with SSN).
  15. Awe Kooda bilaxpak Kuuxshish – (Crow adoption)
  16. Baraka Hussein Abu Oumama  (Gaddafi, Libya)
  17. Baraka Obama  (Alinsky Poster -Breitbart)
  18. The One
  19.  Zero
  20. King Obama (written in cement by Obama)
  21. Barak Obama (NJ ALJ Jeff S. Maslin, ruling, p. 7)
  22. Barack Soetoro


ARREST OBAMA FOR FALSE REPRESENTATION OF WHO HE IS. ARREST HIS ENABLERS TOO!

Who IS This Man? HE IS A FAKE!!



For over years now, We the People have been asking this question, “Who is this man?”  Today we are no closer to the answer than before.  In fact, we become more confused by the day.
Is his name Barack Hussein Obama II, as contended in two books arguably written by him and on a specious COLB presented to a gullible lamestream media on partisan blogs and campaign websites?  Or is his name Barack Obama Jr., as he was called in the infamous FactCheck blog defense of his British/Kenyan citizenship? Or is his name Barry Obama, as (it is claimed) he was known in school in Hawaii?   Or is his name Barry Soetoro, as school registration forms from Indonesia seem to indicate?  Or is his name Soebarkah, as his mother’s passport records seem to indicate?  (A one word name, in keeping with Indonesian tradition, because he was adopted by his stepfather.) Or is his name Barry Dunham, Steve Dunham, or the latest:  Barrack Houssein Obama II, as indicated on records from a U.S. MILITARY Court-Martial of patriotic American, LTC Lakin, who himself put his life and freedom on the line in a quest to learn the answer to this question:   WHO IS THIS MAN?
Link to the records; see for yourself:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/37124816/Court-Martial-of-LTC-Terrence-Lakin-Ruling-on-Discovery-2-Sep-2010

Why would a transcript from a U.S. government court-martial refer to the president of the United States as Barrack Houssein Obama II?  Has anyone before seen that spelling of his name?  What does this court, this judge, know that We the People do not know?  Will this man answer our question:  WHO ARE YOU?
This is an open thread.  Feel free to comment at will.  I’d like to request, also, that anyone who can, please tell us what is represented on those gold drapes that this POTUS is so frequently photographed in front of.  In addition, can anyone familiar with Muslim names, please inform us as to the possible differences in meaning between Barack versus Barrack, and Hussein versus Houssein?

UPDATE,  9/15/2010.

I forgot this alias:  Barack Abdallah Husein Obama, kindly provided to us by this Tanzanian online newspaper.
http://www.thecitizen.co.tz/magazines/32-political-platform/2708-zanzibar-could-reverse-trend-to-have-president-from-pemba.html
Second UPDATE of the day:
Baracka Hussein Abu Amama from http://www.alarabiya.net/views/2010/08/24/117453.html
They post that his mother changed  Abu Amama to Obama. Goodness gracious.  How many names do YOU have?
UPDATE 11/01/2010: We have yet another name for this person, “Wuod Sarah”, Dholuo for “the son of Sarah.”  In addition, persons who know Luo naming conventions have pointed out that his name, technically, should be Barack Hussein.  Just that.  No  Obama.
UPDATE 06/05/2011:   Lawyer Stephen Pidgeon claims that Barry’s name was changed to its current form from Barak Mounir Ubayd in British Columbia in 1982.
UPDATE 09/01/2011:  Researchers turned up an alias for Barry:  Harrison J. Bounel.  During the 2008 campaign, Obama was adopted by a Native American family (Crow) and given this name: Awe Kooda bilaxpak Kuuxshish
UPDATE 09/07/2011: h/t Kathy  and Gateway Pundit.  Gaddafi the tyrant of Libya wrote to Barry: “Our dear son, Excellency, Baraka Hussein Abu Oumama, your intervention in the name of the U.S.A. is a must, so that Nato (NATO) would withdraw finally from the Libyan affair.”  A commenter on another blog explained that Abu in Arabic means “the father of”, and Oumama refers to Obama’s daughters because it means the female children of Umama, the Arabic root of  Obama. Makes sense.  But here’s another name and it seems Gaddafi is tweaking him, doesn’t it?  What does Gaddafi know?  Strangely enough, the man who owned the home where Obama’s Uncle Omar lived when he was arrested for DUI and evading a deportation order is named Ouma.   This man also owned the home where Uncle Omar lived in 1987-1991, when the IRS placed a lien against Omar for non-payment of taxes.  So Mr. Ouma helped Omar for over twenty years. Is he kin?  Did he shorten his name to Ouma, a variation of Obama?
UPDATE: March 5, 2012:  When Obama appeared in a panel discussion with other Alinsky-lovers in 1998, his name was advertised on a poster as Senator BARAKA ObamaMinutes of a Board of Education from Paterson, NJ, where they talked about students being introduced to IL State Sen. Baraka Obama.  Now where did they get that spelling? h/t SEO.
UPDATE: April 17, 2012: Obama carved his name in cement near his school in Hawaii:  King Obama.
In a hearing before an administrative law judge, about Obama’s eligibility to be placed on the New Jersey primary ballot, Judge Jeff S. Maslin dismissed the complaint against Barak Obama (p. 7).  On the first two pages of the ruling, which seem to reprise the petitioners’ filing, Barack Obama is referred to as “the respondent” and “president”.  But which is his LEGAL name?   Does the judge know?  Is that why the judge used Barak, while the petitioners used Barack?
UPDATE: March 3, 2013: Obama apparently used the name Barack Soetoro at Columbia University, 2960 Broadway, in NYC.
ARREST THIS MAN... HE IS A FRAUD!!!

SO WHAT IS HIS NAME ???
  1. Barack Hussein Obama II
  2. Barack Obama Jr.
  3. Barry Obama
  4. Barry Soetoro
  5. Soebarkah
  6. Barry Dunham
  7. Steve Dunham
  8. Barrack Houssein Obama II     (U.S. Military   – Lakin)
  9. Barack Abdallah Husein Obama  (Tanzanian newspaper)
  10. Baracka Hussein Abu Amama  (Abu Amama changed to Obama)
  11. Barack Hussein
  12. Wuod Sarah -   (Dholuo for the “Son of Sarah”)
  13. Barak Mounir Ubayd  (Stephen Pidgeon – British Columbia)
  14. Harrison J. Bounel – (Name associated with SSN).
  15. Awe Kooda bilaxpak Kuuxshish – (Crow adoption)
  16. Baraka Hussein Abu Oumama  (Gaddafi, Libya)
  17. Baraka Obama  (Alinsky Poster -Breitbart)
  18. The One
  19.  Zero
  20. King Obama (written in cement by Obama)
  21. Barak Obama (NJ ALJ Jeff S. Maslin, ruling, p. 7)
  22. Barack Soetoro


Thursday, May 1, 2014

Communist China to beat Capitalist America in a Global Economic Battle? REALLY ? WTF??

China poised to pass US as world’s leading economic power this year

 

 


The US is on the brink of losing its status as the world’s largest economy, and is likely to slip behind China this year, sooner than widely anticipated, according to the world’s leading statistical agencies.
The US has been the global leader since overtaking the UK in 1872. Most economists previously thought China would pull ahead in 2019.


The figures, compiled by the International Comparison Program hosted by the World Bank, are the most authoritative estimates of what money can buy in different countries and are used by most public and private sector organisations, such as the International Monetary Fund. This is the first time they have been updated since 2005.

After extensive research on the prices of goods and services, the ICP concluded that money goes further in poorer countries than it previously thought, prompting it to increase the relative size of emerging market economies.
The estimates of the real cost of living, known as purchasing power parity or PPPs, are recognised as the best way to compare the size of economies rather than using volatile exchange rates, which rarely reflect the true cost of goods and services: on this measure the IMF put US GDP in 2012 at $16.2tn, and China’s at $8.2tn.

In 2005, the ICP thought China’s economy was less than half the size of the US, accounting for only 43 per cent of America’s total. Because of the new methodology – and the fact that China’s economy has grown much more quickly – the research placed China’s GDP at 87 per cent of the US in 2011.
For 2011, the report says: “The US remained the world’s largest economy, but it was closely followed by China when measured using PPPs.”

China’s crisis is coming – the only question is how big it will be

Financial crisis in China has become inevitable. If it happens soon, its effects can be contained. But, if policy makers use further doses of stimulus to postpone the day of reckoning, a severe collapse will become unavoidable within a few years.
The country is in the middle of by far the largest monetary expansion in history. On one widely used measure, M2, its money supply has tripled in the past six years, an expansion four times as large as that of the US over the same period.

 
With the IMF expecting China’s economy to have grown 24 per cent between 2011 and 2014 while the US is expected to expand only 7.6 per cent, China is likely to overtake the US this year.

The figures revolutionise the picture of the world’s economic landscape, boosting the importance of large middle-income countries. India becomes the third-largest economy having previously been in tenth place. The size of its economy almost doubled from 19 per cent of the US in 2005 to 37 per cent in 2011.
Russia, Brazil, Indonesia and Mexico make the top 12 in the global table. In contrast, high costs and lower growth push the UK and Japan further behind the US than in the 2005 tables while Germany improved its relative position a little and Italy remained the same.
The findings will intensify arguments about control over global international organisations such as the World Bank and IMF, which are increasingly out of line with the balance of global economic power.

When looking at the actual consumption per head, the report found the new methodology as well as faster growth in poor countries have “greatly reduced” the gap between rich and poor, “suggesting that the world has become more equal”.
The world’s rich countries still account for 50 per cent of global GDP while containing only 17 per cent of the world’s population.
Having compared the actual cost of living in different countries, the report also found that the four most expensive countries to live in are Switzerland, Norway, Bermuda and Australia, with the cheapest being Egypt, Pakistan, Myanmar and Ethiopia.

Please share this article with others using the link below,  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d79ffff8-cfb7-11e3-9b2b-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz30TytbeQN