EU must act! How Google fiddles with your search results and mine!

11, August, 2020

Are you being manipulated by Google? Are they playing tricks on you so you become their commercial and political puppet? How can you tell?

One analyst found that:

‘Google maintains nine different blacklists to suppress information worldwide. We are all aware that Google deletes or blocks access to videos on YouTube, which it owns, but few people are aware that Google blocks access to millions of websites. On January 31, 2009, Google blocked access to virtually the entire internet for 40 minutes.’

You can test whether Google and Twitter are impartial. Here’s how using a simple technique below.

Global manipulation (c) Bron

Question: When you make a search, does Google really show which articles most accurately reflect the search question? Or do some human manipulators fiddle the results?

Remember that Google and Twitter have every motive to cheat. They sell advertising. They want you to buy things.

For example the Pharmaceutical sector spends hundreds and millions of dollars lobbying the US Congress. They oppose efforts to reduce prices. Critics of their products, pills and vaccines get stifled. What are you prevented from learning about the ‘Covid-19 pandemic‘? President Trump says that Big Pharma are ‘getting away with murder‘. How do they use Google to their advantage?

And Google may want you to vote for certain parties, and discourage others. Political parties get huge contributions from industries, trade unions and NGOs. All are active on the Net. Does Google load the dice so the results you get are altered in their favour of parties?

Worse, the big Info Tech companies sell your personal data — they know your intimate secrets. They can often predict what you can do — sometimes more than you can.

That means you are manipulated.

Public frauded

Google, compared to other search engines, does not give the public what is the true result. In the run-up to the US elections, conservatives complain of a bias.

You want impartial searches? Don’t go to Google. In the run-up to the US elections in November, search for these supporters online and you will often find the results are biased in favour of critics rather than the original source.

The result? The main Info-Tech companies make citizens who want to read the original source feel like they are someone with a minority viewpoint.

Is this a gripe or a fact? A senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Psychology and Technology studied the phenomenon in detail. Dr Robert Epstein testified to the US Senate Judiciary Committee. Here’s what he said:

In 2016, biased search results generated by Google’s search algorithm likely impacted undecided voters in a way that gave at least 2.6 million votes to Hillary Clinton (whom I supported). I know this because I preserved more than 13,000 election-related searches conducted by a diverse group of Americans on Google, Bing, and Yahoo in the weeks leading up to the election, and Google search results – which dominate search in the U.S. and worldwide – were significantly biased in favor of Secretary Clinton in all 10 positions on the first page of search results in both blue states and red states.

Dr Epstein says that this Search Engine Manipulation Effect of the Google algorithm is used not only in USA but in other countries as well to manipulate elections.

Both the US and EU authorities should ask Dr Epstein for access to his database of searches over the last four years. They will show the dirty underworkings of western politics. If they are made public then all citizens can judge for themselves.

Dr Epstein outlined the results of his investigation:

I know the number of votes that shifted because I have conducted dozens of controlled experiments in the U.S. and other countries that measure precisely how opinions and votes shift when search results favor one candidate, cause, or company. I call this shift “SEME” – the Search Engine Manipulation Effect. My first scientific paper on SEME was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in 2015 (https://is.gd/p0li8V) (Epstein & Robertson, 2015a) and has since been accessed or downloaded from PNAS’s website more than 200,000 times. SEME has also been replicated by a research team at one of the Max Planck Institutes in Germany.

Dr Epstein calls this manipulation one of the most powerful means to control subliminally the democratic essentials of society.

SEME is one of the most powerful forms of influence ever discovered in the behavioral sciences, and it is especially dangerous because it is invisible to people – “subliminal,” in effect. It leaves people thinking they have made up their own minds, which is very much an illusion. It also leaves no paper trail for authorities to trace. Worse still, the very few people who can detect bias in search results shift even farther in the direction of the bias, so merely being able to see the bias doesn’t protect you from it. Bottom line: biased search results can easily produce shifts in the opinions and voting preference of undecided voters by 20 percent or more – up to 80 percent in some demographic groups.

Democracy is at stake. The EU needs to act immediately. This type of manipulation is an entirely different and more dangerous dimension from the present line of EU investigation at StratCom, disinformation and advertising.

Robert Schuman and the co-signatories of the European Community system provided a system where impartial information could be presented to the public for use in their decision-making. This requires that the Consultative Committees be elected on a Europe-wide scale by European associations representing all elements of organised civil society. Whether in the European Coal and Steel Community or the European Health Community access to valid information was to be guaranteed by the Human Rights Convention of the Council of Europe.

In the Gaullist period into the 1960s the Council blocked this. Access to impartial information was feared both by ultra-nationalists and euroCommunist federalists like Spinelli, who knew it would destroy their malign ideology.

It is now more urgent than ever that European peoples and its leaders implement this measure.

Human intervention

We are a pawn in the Google version of Big Brother — unless we take precautions. That trap includes not only a biased algorithm. It includes some human being fiddling with the results for partisan purpose.

The Info Tech giants are making a financial, economic or political gain out of this.

The Info Tech giants are already the biggest companies in the world with combined $5 Trillion turnover. They are not manipulating the results for small time users. Their main customers are global giants too.

The results may be fiddled to provide an ideological bias so the public will eventually be ‘educated’ according to the manipulator.

Arabs, Jews, Oil, Russians, EU, Blackmail

How would Google and Twitter react to an article covering all the above terms, all somewhat controversial to some sections of the public? On 6 July I published an article dealing with disinformation, Fake News, covering these topics.

Palestine-Israel: Now the Blackmail is over, can Europe bring a Schuman Plan for Peace?

I also tweeted about the topic and left a link at eurdemocracy.com

On the morning after I checked public reaction by asking Google for search results of the article. On Google I used a three word search <> the most prominent in the title of the article.

Google put my article in first position on the first page on the morning after. But when I checked that evening it was nowhere to be seen on the first six pages. It had disappeared from sight! What I got was a long list of articles about how Israel is blackmailing Palestinians!

The search result was the same with or without the hyphen. Zero links.

The Alternatives search engines
I checked:

Duckduckgo,com.

It came up first on the first page. (even with the hyphen)

Bing.com

It came first on first page (with the hyphen)

Dogpile.com (which uses Google and other search engines) With the hyphen there was not even a reply. I dropped the hyphen and it came up first on first page.

Yahoo search. It said nothing of this description available please check your spelling etc. So I dropped the hyphen and the article came up on first page second article.

Google’s political dealings

Google and Yahoo both use human modified search engines algorithms to give a particular bias. This seems to involve exclusions as well as skewed results. The Google COE billionaire Eric Schmidt contributed to and worked for the Hillary Clinton campaign. He was a frequent visitor to the Obama White House and known as ‘Obama’s chief corporate ally.‘ Google and associates had ‘at least 427 meetings‘ with the Obama White House.

Schmidt resigned from Google in 2017 when Mrs Clinton did not get elected. That failure happened in spite of what the Epstein study of search engine manipulation concluded that Google skewed search results delivering around 2.6 million extra votes among ‘undecideds’ in the Clinton Democrat direction at the election. Dr Epstein testified that to Congress and he said he was a Democrat voter.

Continuing Google Saga

At this time by the next Friday my article was confirmed on Bing and other search engines as still top of their first pages with the 3 terms.

On Google its was nowhere to be seen.

On Saturday evening 11 July, I found that my article was still rated 1st or second on the main search engines. Then, surprise surprise, I found my article suddenly appeared first on page one of Google search.

Does the weekend imply change of staff supervisors at Google?

But by Sunday it had disappeared from Google‘s first 7 pages. How do they explain this on-off censorship of what is supposedly an impartial search engine?

I was then running second on Duckduckgo and Yahoo and first on Bing.

Nothing on Google except pages about how Israel blackmails the PLO /Palestinians.

Twitter block

When I first published my post, I also sent out a Tweet. But when I checked the link to eurdomocracy.com it did not work. So I had to change the link to another site at blogactiv.eu .

I asked my online hosting service why, when I included a link to eurdemocracy.com in a Twitter message, it did not work. It was refused. I had to delete the tweet and use the blogactiv.eu backup copy of the article as the link source.

The help desk suggested it was the usual censorship by the hi tech industry.

Here’s what they wrote:

Thank you for contacting our support department. When I insert ‘eurdemocracy.com‘ in a browser, it does redirect to destination url

https://eurdemocracy.blogspot.com/ every time, so I am not able to replicate any issues with the redirect itself.

However, this isn’t to say that private platforms such as Facebook can decide to block any website they wish to, in which there are many examples of them doing so, as well as updating their terms of service several times over the years without warning. We are not sure why Facebook would block a redirect, but they use so many unknown factors on what they allow, that we don’t have any way to know exactly what the issue is.

Solution to cartel Information control

The public deserves a better service. After all, it is the public not the big cartel companies that is paying for the service.

Dr Epstein provides one solution against information cartel control:

The solution to The Google Problem is to declare Google’s massive search index – the database the company uses to generate search results – to be a public commons, accessible by all, just as a 1956 consent decree forced AT&T to share all its patents. There is precedent in both law and in Google’s own business practices to justify taking this step.

He says that declaring Google’s index a commons will quickly give to real competition in the information market place and the means to understand what is manipulated and what is not.

A key aspect of Schuman’s design was to provide Europe with a democratic defence of the powerless against the powerful. The Community was provided with anti-cartel machinery. It should use them on the most vital sectors against Info Tech control of information.

Europe's interest when Trump clears the Washington Swamp

Why did President Obama expel 35 Russian diplomats from USA? Why did Russian President Putin not react with American expulsions? Why did Washington Post get into a panic about Russian hacking into the Vermont Electricity Utility and then admit it was a fake scare? It was adware on a laptop. Why, before exiting gracefully, has President Obama been bringing in a record-shattering 97,000 pages of rules and regulations, some which will restrict press freedom?
The short answer is fog and smoke. Let me explain.

This is not just a simple matter of espionage. It is not about Russian manipulation of the US elections to “force” Donald Trump on a reluctant American electorate. Nor is it just outgoing Obama being nasty to in-coming Trump.
In a democracy all the electorate is free to vote for whomsoever it wants. That is based on information.The crux of democracy is openness and transparency. If there is an attack on democracy itself, then bipartisan or multi-partisan action is required. Not here apparently.
If some Democratic party scandals are spilled by anyone, that does not make the election result invalid. A better informed electorate is what all Democrats should applaud. After all Democrats tried their hardest to paint the dirt on Mr Trump’s past. At the heart of the complaints of the Democrats are the leaking of emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and its chairman John Podesta. These are seen as explosive as Hillary Clinton’s normally highly illegal, non-secured server, plus 650,000 more emails involving Huma Abedin, her Saudi-educated assistant from a prominent Muslim Brotherhood family. She worked also simultaneously for the Clinton Foundation.
According to Julian Assange of Wikileaks, both the Clinton Foundation and also ISIS (Islamic State) received tens of millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
In the email sent on August 17 2014, Hillary Clinton asked Mr Podesta, who at that time worked under president Barack Obama, to help put “pressure” on Qatar and Saudi Arabia regarding the countries’ alleged support for the terrorist group Isis.

“We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to Isil and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” Ms Clinton wrote.

Who is shocked that the Russians are spying on Americans or Americans spying on Russians? Who is shocked that the USA or Russia might want to be involved in “regime change”?
First two things should be made clear.
Russians are expert in disinformation. In Soviet times the biggest department of the KGB intelligence services was the Disinformation Department. One of their major areas of disinformation, as revealed by the highest level defectors, was to instigate the idea — still paralyzing western society — that a Palestinian (non-Jewish) nation exists and that Yasser Arafat was not an Egyptian-born agent of Nasser, but the leader of the phantom nation fabricated in 1964. Previously Arabs refused to be called Palestinians. That was the name the world called Jews! We presented those facts on several occasions. Repetition of lies is a technique used by the Nazi Goebbels and false religions and ideologies throughout the ages.
Secondly, a foreign intelligence service that reveals some truth and fact could well be doing a western audience a favor. Western governments have been losing public trust, typified by Brexit. They have their own disinformation services — they are generally referred to as public relations campaigns. “Spin” operations by definition do not tell the unvarnished truth.
A disinformation service wants to hide the truth and emphasize what is irrelevant or distracting. That’s why we are hearing a lot about Russians and so little about Saudis and Qataris.
The big issue also revolves around the media. The Obama and Clinton camp accuse a multiplicity of non-mainstream news sources of being ‘Fake News’. But it is many of these independent news sources using diverse proofs that call the big mainstream media organizations the real ‘Fake News ‘ sources. They refuse to discuss the most sensitive and hence newsworthy stories.
The Mainstream Media (MSM) have proved themselves incompetent, willingly out of touch, or acting like Spin-Meisters. They plumbed for Jeb Bush as the obvious Republican nomination. They lampooned the very idea of Donald Trump becoming president. Out of the question, they said. But the non stated spin was ‘He is not part of the set-up or the game we have been playing for decades.’ Those who said ‘Trump is the man,’ were ridiculed. But they were right.
So what is the background? What are the present issues?
Petroleum power, Presidential pretender, Podesta, Psychology pioneer, pedophilia . One can add a couple of Cs for Cartels and corruption.
Many these explosive issues are likely to be exposed during a Trump presidency and with an active Republican Congress. The outcome is, as this column said several years ago, likely to open major crises on both sides of the Atlantic.
Power politics is a dirty game and involves the use of inculpating information from the time of the Kennedy assassination and the Nixon Watergate tapes.
Geopolitics use heavy weapons. War, corruption, blackmail. Moral policy will bring peace but is seldom applied. Fifty years ago this year Saudi Arabia tried oil blackmail — the oil weapon — in order to change the foreign policy of USA and Great Britain. Muslim OPEC States tried the same thing again in 1973 during the Yom Kippur war with Israel — this time against the whole of the European Community. They said Europe would not get a drop of oil unless they became anti-Israel in their foreign policy. That would be called Petro-Jihad.
That should give a clear idea about where the battle lines of global politics are drawn.
Instead of selling oil at a profitable 2 dollars a barrel, Saudi-led OPEC ratcheted up the price by cartel action. It reached 147 dollars, then crashed. It doubled in 2016 and is on the way up again. Each year oil States rip the equivalent of multiple times the EU budget from the European economy. That can be compared to sucking the blood out of a free-market economy.
Then they re-invest the cash profits and “spin” it via media and public relations to further jihadi aims. Saudi and other petro-jihad money finance Wahabi mosques across Europe. It finances chairs of Islamic studies in universities. It finances school text books to teach the younger generations about how to worship like a Muslim, facing towards Mecca. Unbelievers are second or third class citizens. There are no churches in Saudi Arabia, nor Bibles.
How much blackmail money is involved? Since 1973, Saudi Arabia alone must have made profits over production costs worth multiple trillion dollars. OPEC as a whole probably gained around 9 trillion.



Where did this fabulous wealth go? Not all went to building castles in the Saudi sands but much went on armaments to jihadi armies fighting enemies of their religio-political theocratic monopoly. (Secularists like Saddam, Qaddafi and Assad). Billions went on warfare to cut territory for pipelines from the Gulf States through to the Mediterranean Sea. This again means having the Sunni-friendly Al-Qaeda and Islamic State bite off parts of Syria. Russia, whose economy depends on exporting high price gas and oil to Europe made ties with Shi’ia Iran. It held the line for Assad. Iran needs its own pipeline to the Europeans knowing they will pay any price in oil and gas blackmail.
Europe has long been more vulnerable than the USA, which now has its shale gas and oil. Nevertheless the Obama administration’s bias is apparent from the rebuke it got from UK’s PM Theresa May. She objected to the unwarranted condemnation of Israel as being under “extreme elements” in Secretary of State John Kerry’s parting speech. That epithet came because Israel would not instantly agree to a Two State Solution with “Palestinian” elements who have the destruction of Israel as part of their Muslim Brotherhood-based Charter.
While the Middle East goes up in flames, women are raped en masse, slavery becomes part of IS consumerism, Christians are expelled or beheaded if they do not convert, the US seems to be transfixed by a few cabins, houses, garages or homes for Jews. Jews should not live in Judea of all places! Why? The UN originally called it ‘Judea’. ‘Palestine’ is just disinformation.
Let’s turn to Germany. In her new year message, Chancellor Merkel says that the biggest threat to Germany is the threat of Islamist terrorism. The German intelligence services have warned that Jihadi groups in Germany are being funded by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait.
Does that shock us? Apparently it shocks President Obama. He has refused to use the term “Islamic terror”. Son of a Kenyan Muslim, he also had a Muslim step-father in Indonesia. “They (terrorists) have perverted and distorted and tried to claim the mantle of Islam for an excuse for basically barbarism and death,” he said. He says more Muslims are being killed by Muslims than Christians. That is true. They are in full jihad against each other.
Unless Europe takes stern and intelligent action, it should not expect the bloodshed to pass it by. We are living in an unusual period when there has not been major warfare with Islam. Since Islam’s inception in the seventh century, some 270 million lives have been lost by Islamic invasion. They were not national invasions but invasions driven by Islamic ideology to convert or kill.

According to Robert Schuman, founder of the European Community, peace requires tolerance and the patience search for truth. President of Egypt al-Sisi told Egypt’s top clerics and scholars at Cairo’s Al-Azhar university that they must change their {political} ideology and bring the seventh-century religion of Islam up-to-date with realities. The ideology had become ‘hostile to the entire world.‘ He asked:

‘Is it conceivable that 1.6 billion Muslims would kill the world’s population of 7 billion, so they could live on their own?‘

Dr Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam has tabulated 548 battles of Islamic armies in Europe or formerly Christian areas.


In contrast the Crusades had less than a score of battles in Syria, Israel and Egypt. The dynamic of this process can be seen in the short video Battles with Islam or the longer version.

Now it is abundantly clear why Donald Trump has selected Rex Tillerson, a former oil company executive — who knows how to negotiate without making enemies — as his new Secretary of State. It is also clear why the outgoing Obama administration and the disappointed Clinton supporters are seething for having lost the election.

Eretz4: The EU corruptly underwrites the Palestinian Mafia

Mafias and criminal gangs often demand of their young, would-be adherents commit an act of theft, violence or even murder. Mafias represent the opposite to civilized society because they rule by violence and by a central violent leadership.

So what should we expect from the European Union whose foreign policy is supposed to encourage Human Rights and the Rule of Law? It should denounce murders. It should expose any operation that glorifies murder as an entrance ticket to Mafia power. Instead the EU is acting exactly in opposite way. It is acting as the scared victim of violence that cannot or will not speak out against injustice and crime.

After vicious arm-twisting by the US Obama administration, the Israelis recently released 26 murderers. Why did the Nobel Peace Laureate Barack Hussein Obama want a democracy to distort and interfere with the judgements its Courts of Justice? Because the Arab Palestinians refused to talk peace with the Israelis and set pre-conditions. To anyone with a couple of brain cells, that should signal a corrupt peace-process.

Why should genuine peace-seekers set pre-conditions? What sort of pre-condition is 'Get my gang of convicted murderers out of prison first!'?

Did the European Union denounce this travesty to disrupt court-based justice? Not at all! Would any European State or its politicians release convicted murderers in similar circumstances?

What do normal civilized European States do when murderers are released from jail? Two things. They try to rehabilitate them but make sure that the population in general is protected from further crime and violence.
What does a Mafia do? It promotes them. What does the Arab Palestinian Authority do when 26 convicted murderers are released? What would YOU do if you had to decide on what to do with

• murderers who dressed as women to kill the female driver who took Arabs to work,
• murderers who threw grenades, set off bombs and helped organize other deaths
• murderer of a man caring for flowers in his greenhouse,
• murderers who stabbed passengers on buses,
• murderers who kidnapped and killed hikers
• murderers who attacked a car and killed its passengers when it entered their village,
• an axe-murderer who killed a 79-year old man reading a book in a park
• murderers who stabbed an orchard-owner with a knife and a pair of pruning shears,
• a murderer who killed a French woman tourist in a restaurant where he worked,
• a member of a gang implicated in the terrorist murder at the holy site of Machpellah cave, the burial place of Abraham, Sarah and Jacob, the patriarch of the twelve tribes of Israel. ????

So what did the Arab Palestinian Administration do? The unelected president of the PA Abbas/ Abu Mazen called the released murderers 'HEROES'!! He celebrated with fireworks. Then he took action.

What?
He divided up the the murderers into two groups. The more vicious killers had been given sentences of more than 25 years by the Courts. Abbas gave all of them 50,000 dollars. That's not all. They were given high paying jobs. They had the choice of becoming Deputy Minister in one of the many Palestinian ministries. Or if they were especially vicious killers they were given the rank of major general in the army also with a fat salary. Those Palestinian terrorists who were sentenced to 15 to 25 years were given the position of Deputy Director at the ministries or a military rank of brigadier general.

'The prisoners are part of our fighters and therefore deserve money,' said the Palestinian Authority. Ahem. Whose money would that be?

How does the European Union recruit its Directors general? Do they look for people who were convicted of murder? Is that the critical condition?

Clearly the PLO want the convicted  murderers -- now generals or policy-makers -- to train other young people to murder other innocent citizens. Isn't this terror game clear to everyone? On recent figures the PA has 75,000 officials and pensioners --twice the number of the EU's officials!

When asked repeatedly, the Commission refused to give any comment at all on this outrage. Why is the EU acting like a scared dog?

The answer is oil. The EU will grind to a halt if the Arabs and OPEC cut off petroleum supplies. They already did this in the 1970s when an oil embargo was placed on all its nations with total embargo on the Netherlands and Denmark. The oil-exporters applied the Oil Weapon to get  Europe to change its foreign policy towards Israel. Blackmail.

The exorbitant profits between the minimal cost of collecting from oil wells, now compounded over forty years amounts to a Money Weapon. It is the source of great global instability. 

The only way Europe can free itself is to become independent in its energy production. Part of the illegal, closed-door deal was that Europe would financially support the so-called Palestinians who mysteriously sprang into existence in 1964. The EU has spent billions on the 'Palestinians' without result whether under Hamas or Fatah. Three out of four 'Palestinians' say the whole administration is corrupt. It doesn't take a genius to work that out. Apparently the EU -- the wealthiest grouping in the world with 500 million brainy citizens -- has no one up to the job.

A report to be published soon says that the 'Palestinians' have squandered some TWO BILLION of EU aid -- lost without proper trace. Why should the hard-pressed European taxpayer put up with it?

So scared is the EU that it only denounces Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. Its EU foreign policy chief denounces the building of garages, kindergarten and homes in Israel's capital Jerusalem. Some 1100 international jurists and professors of law from around the world have written to the EU saying that Israel has every right according to international law to build there and in Judea and Samaria. Instead the misnamed European External Action Service takes a politically prejudiced view that politics trumps international law.

Where is Europe - the defender of Human Rights? Where is the defender of the Rule of Law?

Jihad8: Before acting 'like a monkey with a grenade,' EU should get facts straight on Syrian poison gas attacks

Why is the United States rushing to take military action in Syria BEFORE it has ascertained the facts from the United Nations chemical warfare specialists? The US alleges that the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad has exploded chemical weapons with poison gas just a few kms east of Damascus at Ghouta in disputed suburbs of Jobar, Zamalka and Ein Tarma and possibly several others to the south. What will more deaths by US missiles achieve among those like al Nusra/Qaeda who say they 'love death more than life'?

There is no doubt, said US Vice-President Biden, that the Assad regime was responsible. They have the weapons and the means to deliver them, he said. US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said that the US military was ‘ready’ to attack. ‘I think the intelligence will conclude that it wasn’t the rebels who used it, and there will probably be pretty good intelligence to show that the Syria government was responsible,’ he told the BBC. This conclusion was reached before the UN inspectors were given safe passage to view the site and collect materials. Secretary of State Kerry said on Monday 26 August that there was ‘undeniable’ evidence of a large-scale chemical weapons attack on several towns in the Ghouta area. U.S. intelligence, he said, strongly points to Assad’s government as the guilty party. Even if they have intercept correspondence, does this mean that only one side is responsible for poison gas? What are the facts?

1. The timing is suspicious. This latest chemical attack took place on Wednesday 21 August at the time when UN chemical warfare experts had just arrived there to investigate another alleged chemical attack dating back to March. Assad had agreed to talks with rebels. Now they are off. That does not appear to be to Assad’s benefit. The USA said military action was needed immediately. Then Assad agreed to open up the path for inspectors on the 21 August attack. This did not change US policy. The US and UK do not appear to want the results of the UN inspectors investigations.

2. The alleged culprit is dubious. Carla Del Ponte, member of the UN investigating panel on Syrian war crimes, former prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, uncovered evidence from casualties and medical staff pointing to ‘strong, concrete suspicions‘ that the rebels, not Assad, were responsible for this March attack. ‘This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities.’ A White House spokesman for President Obama disagreed. He said it was likely that President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, not the rebels, were behind any chemical weapons use. After this debunking by UN Senior investigator Carla Del Ponte, the US ceased its insistence on a military attack as response to the loss of life by the poison gas attack.

3. Both sides have chemical arms. Assad’s ambassador told the UN in July that rebels had captured chemical stock. Russia supplied the UN with 80 pages of evidence that can be analyzed. Videos show the Free Syria Army using sarin or poison gas and Saudi chemicals uncovered earlier at Jabar by Assad forces.

4. Neither side are Sunday school teachers. They cheat, lie, and ruthlessly kill opponents. Christians are being crushed. The rebels include foreign jihadis, funded heavily from the Sunni oil States. EU-banned terrorists such as Lebanon’s HezbAllah and Iranian forces like the Revolutionary Guards help Assad while vicious, infidel-hating al-Qaeda groups like Jabhat al-Nusra lead the rebels. Qataris have poured some 3 billions dollars to aid the rebels and Saudi Arabia has supplied arms. The Saudis are now the biggest funder of the rebels. The Assad regime is non-sectarian and various religions have cohabited in Syria.

5. The haste is uncalled for. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin warned the West against acting like a ‘monkey with a hand grenade.’ The Russians also warn against action that has no known forensic evidence to condemn the alleged perpetrator and without UN Security Council accord.

6. Facts are weak. Estimates of fatalities at Ghutta are uncertain. They range from 100 to 1300 people. Why such a hugely uncertain body count? Where are the bodies buried? Russian Foreign Minister Lazrov criticized US impetuosity and scorn for facts: ‘They cannot produce evidence, but keep on saying that the ‘red line’ has been crossed and they cannot wait any longer,’ he said Monday, 26 August. Russian State TV has shown Syrian videos of actors playing the part of victims, being daubed with blood, before shots were taken of the ‘dead’.

7. The timing is politically suspicious. The outcome of this latest chemical weapon attack was the postponement of peace talks between Assad and the mixed-bag ‘Free Syrian Army’. It plays into the hand of the hardliners, paid for by Qataris and other oil-rich Sunnis who want to use every means to remove Assad and his clique. ‘No compromise’ plays into the hand of violent extreme jihadis.

8. The outcome could be catastrophic for Europe. The EU is the world’s largest economic power. It will be deeply affected by Jihadis igniting the Syrian-Lebanese tinder box which will then explode across Israel, Gaza and Egypt. Why has the EU not at least had proper debates in national, European parliament and in the United Nations? Western experts have diverse views on the video evidence some pointing to obvious fraud. The conflict has all the nature of a sectarian dispute between Sunnis, Shiites and the numerous Islamic sects that Jihadis cannot tolerate. These include Ismailis, Twelver Shias, Sufis, Druzes, Yazdis and Bahai.
Syria has a delicate balance of religious populations. The ruling clique is Alawite, a secretive Islamic sect associated with the Shiites. It makes up around 11 percent of the people.  However 60 per cent of the population are Sunni. Christians of various persuasions amount to 13 percent. The Jews which were numerous for thousands of years now reduced to a few hundred.

9. The motivation of the US is unclear. The American leaders are not religious illiterates. President Obama was raised a Sunni Muslim in Indonesia. His father and step-father were both Muslims. His brother Malik Obama is actively propagating Islamic ‘da’wa’ that is the conversion of infidels and infidel countries to Islam. He works with President of Sudan Omar al-Bashir, classified by the USA as a State Sponsor of Terror. Key figures in the Obama security administration have served in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries.

It seems bizarre that the USA is rooting now on the side of just one faction in the Syrian civil war. That side involves Jabhat al Nusra a jihadist Sunni organization, a clone of Al Qaeda. Why on earth would USA support al Qaeda-led rebels against the Shiite Alawite regime of Bashur al Assad?

The EU is founded on religious tolerance, free speech that extends to critical analysis of religious opinions.

The Middle East has been devastated of its Christians from Iraq to the Palestinian Authority and Gaza. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, the leader of the worldwide Anglican church, said we are living in ‘terribly, terribly dangerous times‘. He warned that military intervention could have catastrophic unseen consequences. There are ‘numerous intermediate steps’ between doing nothing and regime change, said Welby who has toured the Middle East and Africa seeking paths for reconciliation.

• Western experts have questioned video that shows unreal white foaming at the mouth. They say that poison gas would produce a yellow retching foam or one covered with blood.
• Victim do not show characteristic pinpoint eyes after poisoning. Sarin is doubted. Little evidence of convulsions or secondary contamination.
• No people attending ‘poisoned’ people had protective clothing.
• No doctors seem affected by poison gas with no reported fatalities among doctors or medical staff.
• Some videos were, according to Russian authorities, broadcast before the  alleged time of the attack!
• Body evidence and numbers remain untestified.

How can the EU cut through the disinformation to the real facts? The European Community system set up by Robert Schuman initiated a scientific centre so that scientific facts can be distinguished from political and ideological narratives. Science is one of those supranational values on which the European Community is based. The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre has been called in to investigate frauds in all areas of European life. An escalating Syrian and Middle Eastern religious war will cost all Europeans dear. The JRC should be asked immediately to investigate fraud in video evidence, in medical evidence and chemical analysis. European citizens require this action!

Obama1: Europeans! Prepare for a huge, Watergate-type, transAtlantic crisis!

A German Defence Minister resigned when it was revealed that many parts of his doctorate were plagiarized or "in error'. The British coalition government was shaken when a minister resigned over alleged fraudulent reporting of an eight-year old speeding fine. The Hungarian President resigned when it was considered that he quoted references in his doctorate without proper sourcing.

What would have happened if these politicians had refused to step down amid the accusations? A long and bitter dispute would have ensued, tying up the resources of the nation.

The German President resigned when the Parliament asked for legal immunity be stripped from him so that a full inquiry about freebies and favours could be conducted. What would happen if a minister of an EU country was not only suspected of fraud or questions about his degree but spent between one and two million dollars paying a firm of lawyers so that no voter or anyone else could see his college records?
These types of events affect all neighbouring countries. Today our countries are inevitably linked more strongly with each other.

No democracy can be based on lies. It must be based on Judeo-Christian values. 'Democracy owes its existence to Christianity,' wrote Robert Schuman. For the USA, democracy was established in what Schuman called 'the marvellous edifice of the American Constitution, raised up on foundations envisioned in the spirit of their times by Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton. ' (Pour l'Europe, p118.)
What if the country's president was found violating the Constitution, not  being 'a natural-born American citizen ' but a national and a passport-holder of another country? Would he then resign? Would people ask for an explanation for fraudulently posing under false nationality? That would be the least to be expected. Wouldn't that situation make a mockery, not only of the presidency but throw into question all the laws he had signed? What about international agreements, would they be null and void because the signature was an impostor and fraudulent president?

Yet this is what is happening in the United States. All of Barack Hussein Obama's college records have been legally sealed from public view by presidential decree, Occidental College in California, Columbia  and Harvard University.

Why?

Many journalists and voters suspect that he attended these as an Indonesian student, not as an American. Whoever is elected in the 2012 elections, a vast legal debate is about to explode, perhaps paralyzing the presidency in the coming years.

It won't go away. It is now entering the area of criminal process, not mindless political derision against 'Tea Party' activists and so far unsuccessful but outraged lawyers.

As a student Barack  Obama was known as Barry Soetoro, a muslim with an Indonesian step-father. Some student who were taking classes say they can't remember ever seeing him there. (The name Obama comes from his Kenyan father who held a British passport and was suspected of being already married by the Immigration Service when he came to the USA.)  Other people have now deposed legal affidavits that he was intimate with subversive groups involved in terrorist bombing campaigns and underground activities.

Astounding? There is even worse!

Who is paying the multi-million legal fees from keeping these records out of daylight? For the president, the most basic security for employing a federal building janitor seems not to apply. A whole range of documents have all failed multiple authentication tests. When some journalists and voters questioned whether Obama had ever become a US citizen, a Freedom of Information search brought to light Obama's Selective Service Card. According to US law all men must register with the Selective Service within 30 days of their 18th birthday. Evidently something was awry in Obama's case. The document is clearly forged.

It is filled out, not on a 1980 form, but one dating from 2000s, when it was vital if he were to be elected as a Senator. Furthermore the date stamp is clearly fabricated. It has '80' on it as the year and not what the authenticating stamp should have:  '1980'. A closer examination by a forensic team of lawyers, postal management and detectives shows that the '80' was made from cutting the last two digits from a rubber stamp with '2008' and inverting them -- rather badly and amateurishly -- in a US postal stamp.  It was also cut so that the larger, lower part of the '8' appeared less obvious when it was inverted.

This of course is a serious federal criminal offense and as distinct from fiddling with a few lines of a doctorate. Such forgery will likely to fine the perpetrator -- whoever he/she is -- and send him to prison. His reported Social Security Card number 042 68 4425 is also dubious and was issued in 1977 from the State of Connecticut -- where, at around 17-year old, the  Hawaii high schooler Obama never resided.

The Arizona police, acting on the tip-off that Obama might have been born abroad and not Hawaii, checked the incoming flight details to Hawaii in August 1961. They found that all the US Federal border agency cards for that week were missing. The governor of Hawaii in his election campaign promised that he would publish the birth certificate when elected. Despite all his efforts and authority, he gave up.

Given the furore about lack of documentation indicating who exactly the US President is, many citizens created a pressure group so that he would be forced to publish his birth certificate.  A short form birth certificate (COLB, Certification of Live Birth) was published on a website of a group Obama used to work for. Then President Obama published it. What, however, was published on the White House site had errors that required its replacement.  This publishing effort did not stop the protests from pointing out that this type of certification could be obtained without adequate checks, on the unsupported say-so of a relative.

Moreover, it did not indicate which of Hawaii's two hospitals Obama was supposedly born in -- and various of his family and supporters named  one while others named the other!

Before the publication of a major study on the Obama identity forgery and numerous legal actions, the White House was forced to put up at the White House website what they claimed was the full-length Birth Certificate that included the hospital, doctors and other information.

Technical specialists were surprised. This began to look like an amateur production too. In fact it was quite tacky.  It was supposed to be a copy of an opened page from a birth log but the green security hatching was printed over the page and also the space beyond the paper page! A false shadow was added for the gutter as if it had been placed on a photocopier. It hadn't. It was an electronic cut and paste job containing simultaneously binary, grey-scale and even colour letters! (Compare for example the grey tone D of Dunham or last '1' of the reference number 61 10641 under maximum zoom. They are different formats and exist on different layers.) The White House later reduced the resolution of the pdf file on its website but it is clear that some of the letters come from different fonts and white haloes show unexplained manipulation for a scan or photocopy. The higher resolution file published and given to news correspondents on 27 April 2011 seems no longer available. Who is fiddling with the 'facts'?

A group of voters petitioned the Arizona police force to investigate. They wanted to have real proof of the identity of their presidential candidate. Sheriff Arpaio called a volunteer group of former policemen and lawyers plus technical computer experts together. (Volunteer, that is, not paid by taxpayers to avoid political issues. )

He expected them to clear the birth certificate of all suspicion. In fact they proved it was forged. So was the Selective Service Card -- which the police considered a more serious criminal offence.
Much like the start of the Watergate affair, the main media in the USA are not investigating this -- or even reporting it. You can find full press conference report on YouTube, local TV and on foreign media such as Russian radio the sheriff is grilled about the facts and background.

The Arizona police department released some short explanatory videos for the public.
Sheriff Arpaio's introduction 'probable fraud and forgery'
1 Birth Certificate
2 Opening Birth Certificate with Illustrator
3 Was OCR software applied?
4 Was the file optimized?
5 Conclusion: fake and forgery
6 Forgery of Selective Service Card.

If you want to check the detectives' results in detail, view the official police press conference video. Those who have software like Illustrator or CorelDraw can check that the document has NINE electronic layers whereas a scan of a real paper document would not.  The seals and date stamps give no authentication. They can be moved anywhere at will!

Reminder: This is a clearly fraudulent document that the White House chose to introduce. It is still on its
website! Magnify with zoom and you can see the differences in fonts, saved in different formats from separate documents then pasted together!

Another demonstration video using CorelDraw shows that the file has been trimmed and that the hatched 'security' paper show manual manipulation and that white dots have been hand-painted to cover black spots in one layer. Amateur fraud!

A criminal case will not go away. The controversy has moved into new territory. The police say they can identify some of the computers used in the fraud. They now have a pile of  sworn affidavits from international specialists. The next years will increase, not dissipate, the affair.

Europe had better take a lesson from this criminal forgery. Democracy at the European level is languishing. Politicians have lost the trust of the public. Lasting trust can only be built on honesty and truth.
Today's leadership still refuse to put into effect the requirements of the treaties they signed up to. There are no proper European elections, either for the parliament, nor for the consultative committees, nor proper openness in the institutions.

In the European Union there is

• not even an election for the President of the Commission, free of party cliques,
• nor for the President of the European Council!
• The President of the European Central Bank is selected in secret.

Any document revealing who the political cartel selected, how, when, why and where or describing what goes on is forbidden to the public eye.  Once the supranational democratic sytems are inaugurated such biased, partisan politburo politics will be eliminated. It will be far more difficult to commit such identity crime at a European level. There will be multiple cross-checking systems to ensure fairness and justice.
OPENNESS AND THE ABILITY OF THE PUBLIC AND THE MEDIA TO DISCERN TRUTH IS A FUNDAMENTAL OF GOOD GOVERNMENT.

Proliferation2: Why Europe should be tackling the ideological core of terrorism

As much as the EU, terrorists are likely to have set their own objectives for 2020. Are we prepared? How do you stop terrorists getting nuclear materials? At the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, the best that the presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers and other representatives from 47 states could agree on was a non-binding agreement. Europe's founding fathers said that a supranational solution was the most effective, but our leaders are not listening.

Is Washington's vague hope of internationalism sufficient to block a disaster? Will it guarantee Europeans their safety? Would you put your trust in the hope that some "businessman" somewhere was not willing to make a fortune selling whatever technology and materials terrorists needed? Would you trust governments with your life?

Some like Pakistan and its bomb-maker, Abdul Qadeer (A Q) Khan, loaded with the nation's highest honours, actively sought nuclear proliferation for ideological reasons. Khan admitted on national television that he had actively proliferated nuclear bomb technology and designs. But he did not act alone. Nothing could be done without governments and the military to build the bomb.

A Q Khan was trained in Germany, Belgium and above all Holland. He stole the secrets of uranium centrifuge techniques while working in the Netherlands. That careless nuclear security by Europeans has had disastrous results for us all.

Pakistani Government deals were made with China to get bomb plans. Pakistani officials then proliferated uranium technology to Iran, North Korea, Libya and who knows who else. Libya was a big surprise to many when it confessed it had nuclear weapons. A ship had been inspected and was found to be loaded with Pakistani uranium centrifuges.

What of non-State terrorists with a fanatically destructive religio-political motive? Crude bomb plans were also found in an Al Qaida camp in Afghanistan.

"Terrorist networks such as al-Qaida have tried to acquire the material for a nuclear weapon, and if they ever succeeded, they would surely use it," President Barak Hussein Obama told the Washington Nuclear Security Summit. "Were they to do so, it would be a catastrophe for the world, causing extraordinary loss of life and striking a major blow to global peace and stability."

Look what terrorist groups did without atomic weapons. Eleven Saudi young men (and one from the Emirates) died in the four planes aimed at Washington and New York on 9/11. For this suicide mission they did not have to spend millions for their weapons. They did not import complicated technology. For the cost of a few dollars they caused damage estimated at equivalent to knocking out major countries of the EU.

How? cheap knives for opening cardboard boxes. The world market economy itself can be rapidly cut to ribbons by the hands of suicide bombers wielding cheap box knives. The events of 11 September 2001, make it clear that the profitable functioning of a global market is itself the TARGET of suicide fanatics. The opposition for them is the market of the world devourers and US power.

The well-organized destruction of the market and self-destruction of a "consumer" defy the very premises of economic logic usually employed in internationalism. (Economics and trade sanctions is based on the materialist premise of personal economic benefit).

Nonetheless, suicide for religio-political motives affects the market and will continue to threaten the market into the foreseeable future. A score of 'consumers' having bought a few dollars worth of box knives caused an immediate $100 billion worth of damage to New York.

Reuters reported the loss of value in one week on the New York Stock Exchange as $1.2 Trillion. Then as the truth sank in, US stock values plunged with a loss of $6.6 Trillion over the previous 18 months, in parallel with the sudden oil price hike. This sum, said Reuters, was equivalent to the combined economies of Japan, Germany and France.

This was foreseeable. In 1998 Osama bin Laden together with Jihadist groups in Egypt, Pakistan and Bangladesh, announced their intentions in a 'Declaration of the World Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and the Crusaders' (that is the West). Terrorists are interested in far more than the market. Anyone who calls the West 'Crusaders' has a complicated and erroneous agenda.

The most important factor is not the weapon, the box knives. It was the ideology. What motivates the decision of young people to die in what they considered martyrdom? In reality it was nothing other than the manipulation of their minds and their inability to understand truth. Why were they fired up with a corresponding ideological hatred of the West?

Europe must decide. Is it going to continue to be a victim of threats of violence? Will its foreign policy be dictated by violence and blackmail? Or will it reassert its values on open discussion, debate and in-depth analysis of the flaws of such religio-political ideologies aimed at domination.

The religio-political ideology at the core of Europe's present danger is much more insidious than the Soviet ideology of dialectical materialism. That saw Europe threatened by both internally fomented violence, atomic warfare and the lies about a unreal, workers' paradise. It fell apart because of communism's internal contradictions, lack of logic and moral bankruptcy. It took some brave people to stand up against it, both inside and outside the Iron Curtain. The same could be said about Hitler's violence and Nazi propaganda, his ersatz for truth.

Truth will out. Today we need to expose the lies about suicide bombers' false paradise in an open discussion with all the institutions of Europe's democracy. Terrorists are sometimes ignorant and ill-educated on what they profess to be their main motivation: Islam and the Koran. This ignorance represents a major danger to the rest of us. Bad Islamic theology, unreason and prejudice has to be tackled and dismantled as Communism was -- by exposing its fallacies and untruth. Europeans must make clear that threats and violence are not an acceptable alternative to debate. For that challenge Europe must strengthen its own physical, mental and spiritual resources.

Euratom with its huge potential for democratic involvement and a supranational Community must be a fundamental part of this debate. It deals more than controlling nuclear proliferation but democracy, the rule of law, human values, serving one another, the basis of any sane society.

14. European Council publishes orders for public to STAY OUT!

In December — when no one was looking — Member States governments adopted their Rules of Procedure for the new Lisbon Democracy. You missed it? No wonder. This ‘agreement’ was definitely not agreed in public, for the public by the public in a public meeting place in Brussels.

It was all done more or less by post. (Written procedure). It says

Done at Brussels, 1 December 2009.
For the European Council
The President
H. VAN ROMPUY

Done? The public certainly have been. The first of December 2009 is another black day for European democracy.

The newest institution of so-called European democracy confirms that the EUROPEAN COUNCIL wants to be SECRET. It is a way to get rid of the pesky press. The politicians can control the news-hounds like Pavlov’s dogs with ‘off the record‘ news feeds. That makes managed “democracy” so much easier.

Article 4 inset 3 says Meetings of the European Council shall not be public. (OJ 2.12.2009, L 315/51)

It does not say; Occasionally tired and delicate heads of government, after a long trip to Brussels, need some privacy. Nor does it say: As a democratic institution we will eventually open our doors to the public and the press as the Founding Fathers said all such European institutions should be.

It says that the rules preclude any of the Public EVER getting in.

This is the latest sad retreat from the Community democratic system to irresponsible intergovernmentalism. It is the last fling of effete Gaullism. Politicians like making their deals in the dark, away from public light. The ruling political cartel does not want any one to meddle if such a democratic institution or individual wants to argue with secret intergovernmental deals.

The new Rules say:

Without prejudice to the provisions on public access to documents, the deliberations of the European Council shall be covered by the obligation of professional secrecy, except insofar as the European Council decides otherwise.

And of course they won’t. It will take all 27 to say Yes. They will flip coins to take turns for each one to say No.

Europe’s new democracy — after ten year’s of the public’s resistance — will be like getting sardines, squeezed together in the dark, out of their can. It will require a legal can-opener.
The European Council may authorise the production for use in legal proceedings of a copy of or an extract from European Council documents which have not already been released to the public in accordance with Article 10.

Why should the Council be the only institution that remains an absolute disgrace to what should be the greatest democratic organisation in the world — the grouping of 27 democracies of Europe?

The European Parliament has open debates. It is a model for the world.

Despite some hesitations at the start (that is in the 1950s) the Consultative Committees — the nascent debating chamber for organised civil society — are open to the public.

The Economic and Social Committee is open.

The Committee of Regions is open.

The Commission is one of the most open institutions in the world.

The Court of Justice is open.

…. And the Council of Ministers ??? Hardly.

Now the European Council, too! SECRET!

While the European Council was not a real, legal institution, that is was not really an institution in the treaties, it could get away with the political equivalent of murder. It is still murdering democracy.

We now have the extraordinary sight of the President of the European Parliament attending the European Council — and he is made mute by the Council’s lack of democracy. The President of the European Parliament usually does things openly and before the cameras and a forest of microphones. When he addresses the European Council, no cameras are allowed. Radio journalists and their mikes are chased out. The public is excluded. A text may be produced. But the public and the press have no idea how the ‘lords and masters‘ of the European Council react or respond to the suggestions, criticisms and commentaries about their actions from the representative of Parliament.

In short the new rules have gagged Parliament.

General de Gaulle — who wanted to destroy European democracy — would be well pleased. His hand has made Parliament behave like a naughty schoolboy going to see the headmaster. De Gaulle thought that having to speak in a democratic debate in public was demeaning and undignified. He did not like giving reasons for his actions. He did not even tell his ministers what French policy was until he announced it. As for Europe, he preferred the ‘empty chair‘ ; he was not very much in favour of having any minister go there unless it was to collect money for wine lakes and beef mountains. Nor did he like a display of his henchmen arm-twisting and bullying the smaller States of Europe. The blood on the carpet might upset little old ladies. De Gaulle insisted that the Council should firmly shut its doors to the public.

All democratic chambers should be open to the public and the press, unless the public can be convinced there is a valid reason why they should not be. That is a basic principle of democracy. From the time when Celtic tribes assembled to debate matters in public, it has been so for a few thousand years.

And don’t give me that ‘Oh, if the Council is open to the public, they will talk in the corridors.‘ Parliamentarians talk in the corridors. But they have a debate in public.

Why? So that there will be a public record of what they say, how they say it, and why they are moved to say it. Only when the public — let us call them voters or their democratic masters — can have this evidence of their motivation, reasoning and quest for European justice, can they judge them. And fire them, if necessary. Maybe even congratulate them on occasion.

That is democracy. It is quite different from Gaullist autocracy. Had we forgotten? Schuman defined democracy as being ‘At the service of the people and acting in agreement with the people‘. Lincoln said it was ‘government of the people, by the people and for the people.‘ The new Lisbon system is now defined as being SECRETLY for the secretive politicians, by the secretive politicians and for the secretive politicians; people stay OUT, referendums and public opinion are of no consequence to us. Please go away and be ruled in silence.

If you don’t agree with me, please leave a comment telling me where and when the public had a democratic debate and agreed that the Council and now the European Council should be SECRET.

At the moment I feel quite free to speak out so boldly. At the Council offices, no one will be listening or reading this commentary . They’re in the middle of a cat-and-dog fight about who is in charge. Is it the Spanish national presidency or the President of the European Council? Then there is the latest debacle. The US President does not want to attend a Summit with Europe until he knows whose hand to shake first. In the Council the European cartel are still arguing about who is responsible for making Europeans look like a bunch of fools, and not only to the Americans over the EU-US Summit. The undemocratic cartel running Europe has made European government look ridiculous to the wide world.

These so, so, embarrassing matters shall not be open to the public.