Monthly Archives: January 2015

Fw: Martin Luther King, Jr. Assassinated by Government According to Landmark Civil Trial Censored By Media

Watch the short video first to see explanation of the trial and pictures etc. of the crime scene.

Martin Luther King, Jr. Assassination Civil Trial

Martin Luther King, Jr. Civil Trial
MLK Civil Trial Finds US Government Guilty of Assassination

“We have done what we can to reveal the truth, and we now urge you as members of the media, and we call upon elected officials, and other persons of influence to do what they can to share the revelation of this case to the widest possible audience.”
— Coretta Scott King, King Family Press Conference, Dec. 9, 1999.

Dear friends,

The following is a summary of documentation from the 1999 King Family civil trial in Memphis, in which a jury of six white and six black jurors took only one hour to find the U.S. government guilty for the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr

The lack of coverage of this landmark trial and its astonishing verdict is a prime example of how crucial news is suppressed. The fact that you don’t know about this trial, at which 70 witnesses testified over a period of nearly a month, is proof of a major cover-up by both the media and government.

For the best concise summary of this eye-opening trial, watch the six-minute video below of a Canadian public television broadcast on the deafening silence around this major event, and then read the facts of the case below.

Here’s a list of just some of the overwhelming evidence of government complicity introduced in this trial and validated in the jury’s guilty verdict:

  • Usual special body guards provided by the Memphis police were advised they “weren’t needed” on the day of the assassination.
  • Regular and constant police protection was removed from Dr. King an hour before the assassination.
  • Dr. King’s room was changed from a secure 1st-floor room to an exposed balcony room.
  • US 111th Military Intelligence Group were at Dr. King’s location during the assassination.
  • The 20th Special Forces Group had an eight-man sniper team at the assassination location on that day.
  • Memphis police ordered the bushes multiple witnesses reported as the source of shooting cut down shortly after the assassination.
  • Along with sanitizing a crime scene, police abandoned the standard investigative procedure of interviewing witnesses who lived by the scene of the shooting.
  • The rifle James Earl Ray delivered was not matched to the bullet that killed Dr. King, and was not sighted to accurately shoot.

The King family believes the government’s motivation to assassinate Dr. King was to prevent his imminent effort to camp in and occupy Washington, D.C. until the Vietnam War was ended and the war’s resources were redirected to end poverty and invest in US infrastructure. This is consistent with the belief of many top leaders that war is a racket which is used to line the pockets of the mega-corporations and bankers who support them. Read this essay by one of the most highly decorated generals in U.S. history laying it all out with incredible bluntness.

Dr. Martin Luther King’s family and personal friend and attorney, William F. Pepper, was the lawyer representing the King family in this civil trial. The trial, titled King Family versus Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators, is the only trial ever conducted on the assassination of Dr. King. The King Center website fully documents the entire case with a full trial transcript. The U.S. government also denied the King family’s requests for independent investigation of the assassination.

US corporate media did not cover the trial or interview the King family, and textbooks omit this information. Respected journalist and author James Douglass:

“Apart from the courtroom participants, only Memphis TV reporter Wendell Stacy and I attended from beginning to end this historic three-and-one-half week trial. Because of journalistic neglect, scarcely anyone else in this land of ours even knows what went on. After critical testimony was given in the trial’s second week before an almost empty gallery, Barbara Reis, U.S. correspondent for the Lisbon daily Publico who was there several days, turned to me and said, “Everything in the U.S. is the trial of the century. O.J. Simpson’s trial was the trial of the century. Clinton’s trial was the trial of the century. But this is the trial of the century, and who’s here?””

Though the New York Times did include mention of this trial in a revealing article, it was buried inside the paper and never received the front page headlines it deserved. A CNN video aired in 2008 raised further questions on King’s assassination, but still amazingly little of all of this has been reported. A powerful two-page summary reveals the stories of many award-winning journalists who had huge stories like this harshly suppressed by top corporate media ownership.

To honor this great man who was silenced by forces which weren’t ready for the kind of transformation Martin Luther King, Jr. advocated, read some of his most inspiring speeches and quote on this webpage. Great individuals like King, Gandhi, and JFK can be assassinated, but the spirit which revealed their greatness will never die. Each of us can carry this spirit forward within us as we courageously work to reveal truth and do our part in building a brighter future for all of us.

With best wishes for a transformed world,
Fred Burks for PEERS and
Former White House interpreter and whistleblower

Important Note: This essay was based on an original article by my friend Carl Herman. Much of the essay is direct excerpts from Carl’s article. To better understand how the media fails to report some of the most important news stories ever, read this two-page summary. And don’t miss a concise, inspiring essay on how this happens and what we can do about it.

Fw: Sky News: “You Can See the Blood on the Ground, Which Has Been Put There”

Dear Andy,  
This evening’s clip is a corollary
to the one broadcast this morning,
captured by the TV channel,
France 24, in which we see that
the Charlie Hebdo “terrorist” either
shot a blank at the cop, who was on
the ground, allegedly wounded and 
defenseless on his back, to receive
the bullet that was aimed at his head, 
at point blank range, to be coldly
“finished off.”
There’s what looks to me an outside
possibility that a real bullet was shot;
but that it missed and bounced off the
sidewalk. However, due to the lack of
any damage to the sidewalk, to say
nothing of the lack of any damage to
the cop’s head, which would have
exploded like a watermelon, from a 
7.32x09mm round shot at point blank 
range and the lack of any sign of blood
produced by the shot, at the time
of the attack, per the footage, after
which the “terrorist” went running back
to the escape vehicle, it appears to me
more likely that the “terrorist’s” AK-47
was loaded with blanks.
(A magazine or more of blanks used in
the Charlie Hebdo incident could raise
questions about the status of the rest of
this shooter’s victims. But we’ll leave
that aside, for now).
In this Sky News broadcast, the presenter
makes a Freudian Slip, when he says: “You 
can see the blood on the ground, which 
has been put there…” The reporter then
corrects his story, “Because of the blood that
was shed there yesterday.”
I’d go with A) “Put there” because we didn’t
see any B) “Blood…shed there,” during the
shooting, wjhich we saw in this morning’s video.
Not a drop.
The intrepid reporter continues, “The spot
where he fell, has already been marked by
candles, by some flowers, which have been
laid here. This area was largely cordoned of
f last night.”
What? So, after a murder, the cops allow
everyone to pass through the area where
a fellow cop was murdered, in cold blood
allowing contamination of the crime scene?
My two cents say that when the cameras
were gone, blood was ladled out upon the
Parisian sidewalk, in order for the mainstream
story to coagulate…
Video (2 mins):

Now We Know The Plan: More Surveillance and a Patriot Act For Europe


Mac Slavo
January 15th, 2015

The irony is almost worse than 9/11.

Then, President Bush responded by stating, with bravado, that they attacked us because they hate our freedoms.

This time, the attack against the publication of satirical Mohammed cartoon, was not only an act of terrorism, but an attack on the spirit of free speech.

And the government response this time? After staging a photo op of world leaders, various heads of state have proposed new waves of surveillance and repressive attempts to ban encryption and violate the freedom of speech in communication devices through new spy policies and laws.

On Sunday, as more than 3 million people flooded the streets of Paris in support of the free speech principles that Charlie Hebdo embodied, a group of 12 European ministers issued a joint statement calling for internet service providers to more swiftly report and remove online material “that aims to incite hatred and terror.”

Establishing a framework to enhance police work and intelligence sharing concerning the actions of alleged terrorists and extremists, the joint statement from 12 European ministers and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder declares the intent to: “counter violent extremism” and “fight against radicalization, notably on the Internet,” in part through the “swift reporting [and removal] of material that aims to incite hatred and terror.” Meanwhile, it aims to beef European border control, “step up the detection and screening of travel movements” and enhance law enforcement, particularly in “working to reduce the supply of illegal firearms throughout Europe.”

Although the statement takes a vow of respect and “scrupulous observance of fundamental freedoms, a forum for free expression, in full respect of the law,” it doesn’t hold much water with the focus on new surveillance and police powers to chill free speech in the name of fighting radicalization. It seems the terrorists have once again won before the fight has even begun.

The irony should be perfectly palpable, but instead leaders in Europe and the U.S. seem oblivious to the fact that they are, pound for pound, violating many more rights than the terrorists ever could… yet they are not exactly stopping and catching terrorist either. (As a side note, in case the Europeans don’t know, Eric Holder is a pretty poor partner in the effort to reduce the supply of illegal firearms, since he was caught deliberately arming Mexican drug cartels in the Fast and Furious scandal).

The spirit of freedom is hardly embodied by the leaders of the so-called “free world.”

As Ron Paul noted:

The mainstream media immediately decided that the shooting was an attack on free speech. Many in the US preferred this version of “they hate us because we are free,” which is the claim that President Bush made after 9/11. They expressed solidarity with the French and vowed to fight for free speech. But have these people not noticed that the First Amendment is routinely violated by the US government?

“Another lesson from the attack is that the surveillance state that has arisen since 9/11 is very good at following, listening to, and harassing the rest of us–but is not very good at stopping terrorists.”

Specifically, France has already proposed new terrorism-surveillance laws – despite have just passed legislation for new powers in November – while the Anglo power are meeting to ramp up security and UK Prime Minister David Cameron has proposed ridiculous and draconian powers to breach encrypted communications.

Unfortunately, it is par for the course. Problem-reaction-solution.

Quite often, when attacks happen, fear sets in, and forces antithetical to freedom set in, attempting to control and ‘protect’ society, failing profoundly while trampling over society’s most cherished values. America lived through an entire decade of this nightmare after 9/11.  Jillian York, of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, commented:

“Nearly every major terrorist attack in the past couple of decades has been followed by new legislation of some kind. France just pushed through new anti-terror regulations in November, and the [prime minister] is already saying that more will be necessary. Where does it stop? These politicians haven’t demonstrated the need for more surveillance, yet it’s always their go-to ‘solution.’”

Mass surveillance doesn’t only infringe on our privacy, but also our ability to speak freely. The knowledge, or even the perception of surveillance, can prompt writers to think twice before touching upon a given issue.”

It seems that, egged on by the horror of terrorism, all the governments are capable of doing is more spying, surveillance, invasion of privacy and repression – even though it clearly doesn’t work. From the Verge:

“[I]nstead of trying to address problems with the existing expansive surveillance powers, governments merely see these crises and fearful times as an opportunity to simply to ask for more,” Mike Rispoli, spokesman for the London-based watchdog Privacy International, wrote in a blog post Tuesday. “Short of creating a society in which thoughts themselves are monitored and controlled by the State, no amount of surveillance powers endowed upon our governments can ensure that all acts of fanaticism and violence can be predicted and prevented.”

UK Prime Minister David Cameron actually proposed banning encryption as a response to the Hebdo Charlie attacks – and caught a wave
of criticism from the tech savvy who now run the consumer and computing world.

Prime Minister David Cameron said the government should be allowed to read encrypted messages on smartphone apps like WhatsApp and Snapchat, adding that the Paris attacks proved the need for greater government access. Experts say an outright ban on these apps wouldn’t be wise or even feasible, but privacy advocates say Cameron’s comments speak to larger, more troubling trends.

Chastised as being both ‘draconian’ and ‘dim-witted,’ Cameron’s proposed policy is noted as both “ill-thought out and scary” at the same time – a true governement mix of “idiocy” and “draconian.” Cameron stated in his speech:

“In extremis, it has been possible to read someone’s letter, to listen to someone’s call, to mobile communications,” Cameron said. “The question remains: are we going to allow a means of communications where it simply is not possible to do that? My answer to that question is: no, we must not.”

As the Guardian reported:

Independent computer security expert Graham Cluley said: “It’s crazy. Cameron is living in cloud cuckoo land if he thinks that this is a sensible idea, and no it wouldn’t be possible to implement properly.”

Encryption is the backbone of security that allows modern banking, commerce and communication in the digital world.

Encryption is what protects your private details when you send your bank details to a server. It’s required for governments and companies when they store customer information, to protect it from hackers and others. And it’s built right in to whole hosts of messaging applications, including iMessage and WhatsApp.

Tech firms are obviously not going to do business without encryption, so they are instead making preparations to leave the UK if this becomes policy, or likewise, to stop doing business in the UK if British laws would keep global firms from operating as usual.

Eris Industries, which uses open-source cryptography, has said it is already making plans to leave the UK if the Conservative party is re-elected with this policy in its programme.

It is true that terrorists use encryption, much as in real life they use bank accounts, locks, money transfer services and public transport. If the presence of terrorists on a given service is reason enough to shut it down, we’ll find there’s really no form of civil society left to defend.

“We must avoid knee jerk reactions,” said Graham. “In particular, I am concerned about any compromising of effective encryption for consumers of online services.”

Citizens, businesses, and nation states need to protect themselves. Internet companies are understandably offering their customers online services that are better encrypted following recent security incidents,” said Graham.

The Open Rights Group stated:

“Cameron’s plans appear dangerous, ill-thought out and scary,” said Jim Killock, director of the Open Rights Group. “Having the power to undermine encryption will have consequences for everyone’s personal security. It could affect not only our personal communications but also the security of sensitive information such as bank records, making us all more vulnerable to criminal attacks.

Wow… that is some civil liberties blowback. Enough to take us back a few notches in the Internet era and make a visit to the dark ages.

And so it goes………….

Conservative News Today

China & Saudi Arabia Forcing USD Acquiesce


By JC Collins

Back in August of 2014, Saudi Arabia signed a multi year energy deal with its largest crude oil customer China. This energy deal was focused more on nuclear energy and solar energy as opposed to crude.  The agreement between the King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy and Chinese Nuclear Energy Corporation is meant to develop domestic energy projects within Saudi Arabia worth $80 billion for nuclear and $100 billion for solar, between 2014 and 2032.

Saudi Arabia is the largest crude oil producer in the Middle East as well as OPEC.  It is also the largest consumer of hydrocarbons, with about 25% of its production being used for domestic needs.  The country would like to change that by developing nuclear and solar energy which would allow it to export more of its crude and other hydrocarbon production onto the world market.

China is Saudi Arabia’s biggest trading partner and purchases on average one million barrels of crude a day.  Chinese companies are becoming heavily invested with Saudi industrial and infrastructure projects.  These projects within the country will increase the demand for power, transportation, industry, and desalination, increasing domestic crude consumption from 3.4 million barrels per day in 2010 to 8.3 million barrels per day by 2028.

The expansion of credit fueled shale oil development in North America, and elsewhere, like Russian development, has driven up production over supply demands. OPEC members, who now have conflicting oil price policies, as determined by the mandates of low cost producers, such as Saudi Arabia, and high cost producers, such as the United States and Iran, support the eventual fragmentation of the cartel as discussed in the post The End of OPEC.

With the end of QE monetary policies the source of high risk and easy credit has been removed and the economic fundamentals will now begin returning to the world markets, both equity and commodity.  The decrease in oil prices is being promoted as an oversupply, but with the realization of the deepening deflation situation, as being experienced in Europe, and elsewhere silently, the focus will shift to the decrease in the demand for crude as the problem.

With no new QE or credit injection programs coming forth, the global markets will soon adjust to the deflation which is taking place.  The over production of crude at that time will cause the price of oil to collapse even further, perhaps even into the $20 per barrel range.

The adjustment to equities, stock markets, and the speculation which has occurred over the last 7 years is making itself very visible in the price of oil, but will soon spread to other areas of the economy.

The source of easy credit is found in the low interest rate policies of the central banks. These lows rates are causing a flood into the USD as the currencies of the emerging markets are being depreciated. The appreciation in the USD is causing considerable pressure on the existing exchange rate regime.

This pressure is already manifesting itself throughout Europe and Asia and is allowing the United States to continue delaying reform policies to the international monetary framework.  But these delays will not last indefinitely, as the squeeze created by Saudi Arabia is forcing the crude oversupply to continue.  While at the same time demand is beginning to decrease further due to the deflation which is inherent in the removal of easy credit.

The United States is using the amount of USD in the foreign reserve accounts around the world as leverage to delay monetary reform to buy time in order to implement broader geopolitical and economic strategies to secure further advantage in the emerging multilateral system.

The BRICS countries have been putting pressure back on the USD by limiting the amount of accumulation in the foreign reserve accounts.  This is achieved by using more Chinese renminbi denominated assets as opposed to USD denominated assets. This decreases the flow back into the United States as part of the balance of payments system which in turn decreases the domestic requirement for sources of high risk easy credit.

Reluctantly the United States will accept the multilateral monetary framework as it removes the dollar as the primary reserve currency used in the international system.  This will correct the deficit in the balance of payments system and lean to further correction in the exchange rate regimes.

The additional subjective relationship between Chinese interest and Saudi Arabian interests are found in the attempts to eliminate high risk and easy credit in the United States, which ahs fueled the shale oil boom.  A boom which has increased supply and put all oil producers under the pressure of cutting production.

Saudi has been very vocal about not cutting production and driving out the high cost competitors in the industry.

The existing monetary framework is beginning its tremendous shift towards the multilateral and the price depreciation in oil is only the beginning.  The alternative sources of energy, such as nuclear and solar, will continue to develop and be funded by SDR liquidity.  New geopolitical alliances are being constructed and the world of 2016 will be profoundly different than the one that just started.  – JC

Reversing Bretton Woods



By JC Collins

With so much happening on the economic front over the last few weeks its important to ground ourselves and take stock of just what is actually taking place. The continued depreciation of oil and the beginnings of depreciation of the stock markets are the result of the end of Quantitative Easing and the beginnings of the deflationary correction which will build the case for the economic transition from the unipolar USD Bretton Woods based system to the multilateral SDR based system.

There is much talk in the media, both mainstream and alternative, that the return of QE is imminent and the Federal Reserve will not be able to raise interest rates. These proclamations are not considering the reality that deflation and depreciation is exactly what is being engineered, and has been since 2008.

Due to the level of USD in the foreign reserve accounts around the world there is not one single government or central bank that is willing to allow the dollar to collapse.  Nor is there any one country that is willing to submit their domestic currency to the pressure inherent in the status of global reserve currency.  Anyone who suggests otherwise simply does not understand the fundamentals of macroeconomic frameworks and the Triffin Paradox, which has been proven factual by 70 years of USD historical data.

The Triffin Paradox, or dilemma, is defined by the pressure exerted upon a domestic currency when it is used as the global reserve currency.  As the currency accumulates in the foreign reserve accounts of central banks around the world, it creates depreciation pressure on the home economy.  The United States has exported this depreciation though exchange rate imbalances.

The preliminary framework of the multilateral system has been carefully constructed over the last few years with only IMF reform left on the table.  The overt political tension which will soon surround these reforms and the deflation which is now taking place will soon merge into one socioeconomic paradigm which will push the international monetary system in the direction of the multilateral.

As stated in previous posts, 2015 will be a year of transition and implementation.  While alternative analysts have been weaving tales of economic collapse and war, we have been studying and reviewing the actual mechanics of the multilateral framework.

The obvious conclusion that fits the actual metrics and situation which is unfolding is that the original Bretton Woods Accord is being reversed in preparation for the SDR based system, a supra-sovereign unit of account that will not be burdened with the challenges as presented in the Triffin Paradox.

The movement and repatriation of gold which has been much lauded as signs of dollar collapse have in fact been the reversal of the Bretton Woods framework which placed allied gold in the reserve account of the Federal Reserve to support the USD system which was agreed back in 1944.

The dollar has been appreciating while the currencies of the emerging economies have been depreciating because that is the imbalance in the exchange rate system which is inherent in the USD Bretton Woods system.  In addition, the appreciation of the dollar supports the exchange of USD liquidity for SDR liquidity through the substitution accounts which are designed to facilitate a decrease in dollars in the foreign reserve accounts of central banks around the world without depreciating those assets in the process.

Those who promote the idea that China will dump the dollars they hold are spreading misleading information and likely have ulterior motives.  The USD which China holds is an investment which they have made and it is more probable that they will attempt to exchange that investment for an alternate investment as opposed to intentionally depreciating their own assets.

It would be like any of us purchasing shares of a specific company and then implementing a process to devalue those shares.  It would make no sense.

The volatility which is now building in the Euro zone also fits with the mandates of the multilateral framework.  The probability of a fracturing of the Euro is building and I would suspect that the currency basket itself will be fragmented leaving the European Monetary Union itself intact.  Each country in the European Monetary Union will revert to its own domestic currency with Germany and perhaps the Russian ruble representing the two European seats on the IMF Executive Board and in the SDR basket.

When viewed through the lens of the multilateral framework and SDR basket adjustments which are coming this year, the fragmentation of the Euro currency makes sense as a basket of currencies in a basket of currencies situation is unworkable and adds deeper layers of dysfunction.

There is no doubt that this year will be explosive with dramatic changes and devaluation across the macroeconomic spectrum. Which means its all the more important that we remain grounded and continue to build our understanding of the transition which is taking place.

The amount of USD in the foreign reserve accounts around the world has given the United States leverage on how the transition progresses, but progress it will and the USD will become one of many currencies in the SDR basket, and the SDR will become the global reserve unit of account, minus the problems as presented by the Triffin Paradox.

I’m working hard on getting the first installment of The Economic Transition Papers completed.  The first installment, titled Reengineering the Dollar, will explore the issues discussed here in more detail.   – JC


9/11: The Myth and the Reality – David Ray Griffin

This is a very good explanation of what is happening to us. You just have to sit down and digest it, or forever hold your peace.

Dear Andy,

This shocking talk brings together 
an account of the 9/11 tragedy 
that is far more logical than the 
one we’ve been asked to believe. 
Gathering stories from the 
mainstream press, reports from 
other countries, the work of other 
researchers, and the contradictory 
words of US government officials, 
David Ray Griffin presents a case 
that leaves very little doubt that 
the attacks of 9/11 need to be
further investigated.
Disturbing facts emerge that put
into serious question the official
story and reveal an enormous
deception. Packed with bonus
features, expert analysis, in-depth
commentary and unforgettable
conclusions about this tragic event
in American history.

“A devastating expose’ of the myths

and lis in the official conspiracy theory
about 9/11, Griffin scrutinizes the
timeline and physical evidence of
September 11 for unresolved
inconsistencies.” – PUBLISHER’S WEEKLY.
P.S. Please share ForbiddenKnowledgeTV emails
and videos with your friends and colleagues.
That’s how we grow. Thanks.
Alexandra Bruce
Daily Videos from the Edges of Science