30 January 2001 The issue of land rights in Brazil has been fraught since colonial times. Today, 45 percent of the land belongs to one percent of the population, although the ethnic Indians have tilled the land for centuries.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Briley/P... ..O.K...so a criminal is creating foreign policy now. What else is new. Now you should call or write your Senator and ask for strong oversight of the office of the Deputy Secretary of State. To Negroponte, the ends have always justified the means. Negroponte has learned that to gain corporate global fascism, he must label the anti-globalists as the terrorists, therefore, eliminating the resistance to a true corporate empire. He is not the only disciple of this school of thought, but he is the grand executor of many of the crimes which have spearheaded this extreme ideology. The ideology is "the privatization of all the land in the world"...something to be bought and sold as a commodity on Wall Street. This idea of private ownership of land violates the cultural norms of half the world. Those societies have always kept communal grounds on which they can grow their own food; furthermore, this cultural and societal norm does not require a communist dictatorship as predicated by the Neo-cons and empirialist. The Mexican Constitution had the provision of maintaining communal farming lands as a core right of their constitution. As ambassador to Mexico 1989 -1993, Negroponte manipulated the Mexican parliament in eliminating that core value from their constitution to make way for NAFTA. Since the implementation of NAFTA, more than a million Mexican farmers have lost their farms through land privatization by multi-national corporations. To date, the discrepancy between the rich and poor is greater than ever. The expansion of NAFTA can be seen in the North American Union, which was agreed to between Bush, Vicente Fox of Mexico, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin. This agreement will further strip each countries government of its sovereignty and constitutional rights, as the multi-national corporations dictate which laws are best for them to follow instead of their respective governing bodies. This is the true definition of Corporate Fascism. In South Vietnam, Land Reform (land privatization) was being implemented by the CIA, and all those who had an opposition to this ideology were summarily killed. This was the CIA's Operation Phoenix, which was created by the National Security Council, of which Negroponte was apart. A similar policy called Operaton Condor was being carried out in South America. The Phoenix program created mercenary teams of civilian and military men called "death squads". Their job was to assassinate and torture suspected subversives. A State Dept publication says: target for 1969 calls for elimination of 1,800 VCI per month. This policy of "anti-terrorism" created by the National Security Council and National Security advisor and war criminal, Henry Kissinger. The program was responsible for the deaths of 25,000-40,000 South Vietnamese civilians from 1968 to 1971, not to mention many more assassinations in Cambodia and Laos. The Mai Lai massacre which left 504 Women and children dead was an example of these indiscriminate killings by the death squads...and much of this was supervised through Kissinger's Liaison, John Negroponte...State dept officer in charge of Vietnam. These lessons in "counter-insurgency" have stayed with Negroponte throughout his career. http://www.serendipity.li/cia/operati... Negroponte brought those lessons with him to Honduras in 1981...taking over for Ambassador Birns who would not be quiet about the human rights violations in Honduras. From the embassy in Honduras, Negroponte ran a Central American "counter-insurgency" intelligence operation in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala. Privatization or Land Reform was being attempted in Nicaragua under the guise of anti-Communism. As in Vietnam, Negroponte sanctioned CIA trained death squads for assassinations of peaceful civilians. The most popular way of assassinating subversives taught by the CIA, would be to throw them from helicopters into the ocean or the jungle. This was the fate of nuns who were investigating the disappearance of a priest whose body was later unearthed along with 318 other bodies under the torture chambers of a Honduran airbase whose building and administration was supervised by Negroponte. To this day, Negroponte denies knowing anything about human rights violations in Honduras. Henry Kissinger, Negroponte's mentor, recently stated his view that Islamic terrorism is actually anti-global terrorism. "The assault on the international order conducted by radical groups in both Islamic sects". He goes on to call America "the indispensable component of any attempt to build a new world order."

2005 Roy McAlister and Steven Harris. www.knowledgepublications.com

A new, practical hydrogen science for clean and less expensive energy solutions: HyTech's Aquyge

The creationists have sunk to a new low. Violation of another of the foundational values of free societies, the Vote. First they tried to corrupt the comment voting. That failed Then they tried to mark all our comments as spam. That failed. Now they have employed a vote bot to distort all the voting on all of mine and Cdk007s videos. THIS IS FORMALLY BULL! The matter is currently with Youtube security, and we are entirely dependent on them to sort this out for us. If you feel this matter is of sufficient merit that its urgency needs to be stressed to youtube, please do so.

The creationists have sunk to a new low. Violation of another of the foundational values of free societies, the Vote. First they tried to corrupt the comment voting. That failed Then they tried to mark all our comments as spam. That failed. Now they have employed a vote bot to distort all the voting on all of mine and Cdk007s videos. THIS IS FORMALLY BULL! The matter is currently with Youtube security, and we are entirely dependent on them to sort this out for us. If you feel this matter is of sufficient merit that its urgency needs to be stressed to youtube, please do so.

SPECIAL NOTE. PLEASE READ. Two small points. If a star is directly behind a wormhole exit we will not see it. However, if a star is to the side of a wormhole exit its light will be bent into earth so we will see it. This bending will be very different from standard gravitational lensing that is produced by normal massive objects and has been observed countless times. When I stated it's bad to be at the center of the universe, I meant the center of the shell of white holes. But since they connect every point in space to our solar system, in a sense we then occupy a special location in the universe. Which will be crushed by the way. To download this video go to: http://www.mediafire.com/?0jtyk0ylm3m

Since making this video I've noticed that the film is back on LiveLeak. Bravo. Long live free speech. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d9_12... Reaction from Iran http://www.reuters.com/article/worldN... Iran leads the world in executing children http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/06/2... Swiss foreign minister wears headscarf in Iran http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/0... Wife-beating in Islam http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWGA8i... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp3Eam... Hamas bunny threatens to kill Danes over cartoons http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0U2ce... You can download an audio version of this video at http://patcondell.libsyn.com/

Bush met with loud boos in Washington DC. More here:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing - Edmund Burke. the controlled demolition hypothesis is unambiguously rejected by mainstream investigators and structural engineers.[1] Northwestern University Professor of Civil Engineering Zdeněk Bažant, who was among the first to offer an explanation of the collapses, mentions the controlled demolition hypothesis in passing in a 2007 paper, co-authored with Mathieu Verdure. Affirming the mainstream consensus as presented in the NIST report, Bažant and Verdure note "a few outsiders claiming a conspiracy with planted explosives" as an exception. They trace "strange ideas" about, among other things, controlled demolition, to a "mistaken impression" that safety margins in design would make the collapses impossible. While, strictly speaking, superfluous, one of the effects of a more detailed modeling of the progressive collapse, they say, could be to "dispel the myth of planted explosives". Moreover, Bažant and Verdure have proposed examining data from controlled demolitions in order to better model the progressive-collapse of the towers, suggesting that progressive collapse and controlled demolition are not in fact two separate modes of failure.[1] KENNEBUNKPORT ? Rumors of controlled demolition began to circulate immediately following the collapses of the World Trade Center buildings. Today, the hypothesis is normally proposed as part of an argument for insider complicity in the September 11 attacks, or what is often called a "9/11 conspiracy theory". On this view, the destruction of the World Trade Center was a carefully organized spectacle or false flag intended to justify the prosecution of wars abroad and the curtailment of freedoms at home. Because it would be difficult to explain how terrorists were able to plant the necessary explosives, it is argued, the aircraft impacts were deemed necessary to suggest a more plausible external cause of structural damage. The plausibility of this cause is precisely what the controlled demolition hypothesis questions. It proposes that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate collapse and that the buildings would in any case not have collapsed as completely, symmetrically, and quickly as they did without an additional source of destructive energy to undermine their structure. Various sources of this energy have been proposed; thermite and explosives is the most common suggestion being made today.[6][7] Controlled demolition proponents cite mainstream news reports on the day of the attacks that suggested explosions and secondary devices. Journalist and experts commenting on the events as they happened speculated that the World Trade Center collapses were caused by intentionally planted explosives.[8] Many of these suggestions would later be retracted or revised. In a notable example, the Albuquerque Journal quoted an engineer who said that the collapses looked "too methodical" and that "some explosive devices inside ... caused the towers to collapse," speculating that the collision of the planes into the towers was a diversionary attack intended to attract emergency personnel to the scene, followed by the detonation of "a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points" of the towers as the primary attack.[9] He soon withdrew this assessment[10] and later said he had been misquoted: "I only said that that's what it looked like."[11] Engineers were in fact initially surprised by the collapses[12][13][14] and some originally believed that explosives had been involved.[15] The broad outlines of an explanation that did not involve such explosives quickly emerged, however, and took it current shape in the 2005 NIST report.[16] [7] It has come to be known as "the official account" among proponents of controlled demolition.[citation needed] As late as September 2007, however, engineers were still looking for a "credible scientific explanation for the totality of collapse once it began", allowing speculations about controlled demolition to develop. Such an explanation is now about to be published.[17][18] An early book-length treatment of the hypothesis[19] inspired both David Ray Griffin's critical inquiry[20] as well as the Popular Mechanics investigation of 9/11 conspiracy theories.[11] In late 2005, Brigham Young University Professor of Physics Steven Jones made his own pursuit of the hypothesis public.[6] Even before publication of the article in 2006,[21] his interest in the hypothesis brought a measure of scientific credibility and media exposure to the theory. BYU responded to Jones' "increasingly speculative and accusatory" statements by placing him on paid leave in September, 2006.[22][23] Shortly thereafter, Jones accepted BYU's offer of early retirement.