Courtesy of Anti_Illuminati:
Note: Dr. John Coleman came out with the 4th edition of this book in 2006.http://www.peterdavidbeter.com/docs/c300.htmlhttp://public.carnet.hr/dragotadic/dodaci/knjige/committee_300.pdfIndustry is to be totally destroyed along with nuclear powered energy systems. Only the Committee of 300 members and their elitists shall have the right to any of the earth’s resources.
8 ) Suppression of all scientific development except for those deemed beneficial by the Committee. Especially targeted is nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Malthus maintained that man’s progress is tied to the earth’s natural ability to support a given number of people, beyond which point earth’s limited resources would rapidly be depleted. Once these natural resources have been consumed, it will be impossible to replace them. Hence, Malthus observed, it is necessary to limit populations within the boundaries of decreasing natural resources. It goes without saying that the elite will not allow themselves to be threatened by a burgeoning population of “useless eaters,” hence culling must be practiced. As I have previously stated, “culling” is going on today, using the methods mandated in the “Global 2000 Report.”
All economic plans of the Committee meet at the crossroads of Malthus and Frederick Von Hayek, another doom and gloom economist who is sponsored by the Club of Rome. The Austrian born Von Hayek has long been under the control of David Rockefeller, and Von Hayek theories are fairly widely accepted in the United States. According to Von Hayek, the United States economic platform must be based on (a) Urban Black Markets (b) Small Hong Kong-type industries utilizing sweat-shop labor © The Tourist Trade, (d) Free Enterprise Zones where specula-tors can operate unhindered and where the drug trade can flourish (e) End of all industrial activity and (f) Close down all nuclear energy plants.
_______________________The trial run for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) a Club of Rome creation came in a test run against the nuclear power station at Three Mile Island, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Termed “an accident” by the hysterical media, this was not an accident but a deliberately designed crisis test for FEMA. An additional benefit was the fear and hysteria created by the news media which had people fleeing the area when in fact they were never in any danger.
It was considered a success by FEMA and it scored a lot of points for the anti-nuclear forces. TMI became the rallying point for the so-called “environmentalists,” a highly financed and controlled group run out of Aspen Institute on behalf of the Club of Rome. Coverage was provided free of charge by William Paley of CBS television, a former British intelligence agent. FEMA is a natural successor to the Strategic Bombing Survey of WW II. Dr. Kurt Lewin, theoretician for what the Tavistock conspirators called crisis management, was deeply involved in the study.
_______________________Mexico received most of its nuclear power technology from Argentina, but the Malvinas War put an end to that.
The Club of Rome decreed back in 1986 that it would stop exports of nuclear technology to developing countries. With nuclear power stations generating abundant cheap electricity, Mexico would have be-come the “Germany of Latin America.” Such a state of affairs would have been a disaster for the conspirators who have, by 1991, stopped all exports of nuclear technology except that destined for Israel.
What the Committee of 300 has in mind for Mexico is a feudal peasantry, a condition that allows for easy management and looting of Mexican oil. A stable and prosperous Mexico can only be a plus for the United States. This is what the conspirators wish to prevent, so they have engaged in decades of innuendo, slander and direct economic war on Mexico.
According to written testimony by Bhutto, smuggled out of the country while he was in prison, Kissinger severely threatened
him: “I will make a horrible example if you continue with your nation-building policies.” Bhutto had fallen afoul of Kissinger and the Club of Rome by calling for a nuclear energy program to bring Pakistan into a modern industrialized state which, in the eyes of the Committee of 300, was a direct contravention of its orders delivered by Kissinger to the Pakistani government.
What Kissinger was doing when he threatened Bhutto was not official U.S. policy, but the policy of the modern-day Illuminati. One needs to have a clear understanding of just why it is that nuclear power is so hated all over the world, and why the fake “environmentalist” movement, established and financially sup-ported by the Club of Rome, was called upon to wage war on nuclear energy. With nuclear energy generating electricity in cheap and abundant supplies, Third World countries would gradually become independent of U.S. foreign aid and begin to assert their sovereignty. Nuclear generated electricity is THE key to bringing Third World countries out of their backward state, a state which the Committee of 300 has ordered to remain in position.
Less foreign aid means less control of a country’s natural resources by the I.M.F. It was this idea of developing nations taking charge of their destiny that was an anathema to the Club of Rome and its ruling Committee of 300. We have seen oppo-sition to nuclear power in the United States successfully used to block industrial development in conformity with the Club’s [“Post-Industrial Zero-Growth” plans.
It is not difficult to see how the Club of Rome has maintained its grip on U.S. energy policies and where “environmentalist” opposition to nuclear energy is coming from. Perhaps the Club’s greatest success story is its hold over Con-gress in regard to nuclear energy which has had the effect of preventing the U.S. from entering the 21st century as a strong industrial nation. The effect of the anti-nuclear policy of the Club of Rome can be measured in terms of silent blast furnaces. derelict railroad yards, rusting steel mills, shipyards long since closed down and a valuable trained work force scattered across the United States, which may never again be assembled.
___________________________________________________________http://coleman300.com/Store/Details/31Nuclear Power: Anathema to the New World Order
One of the greatest advances made by man was the discovery of nuclear energy as a source of cheap and safe electricity. It promised to transform the world within a time frame of a maximum of three decades. In order to understand world events in both the areas of politics and economics, one must have a thorough understanding of religion and secret societies which play a leading role in world events. Secret societies, more so in 2008 than ever before, greatly influence the course of momentous events. The rich and the powerful belong to secret societies that most ordinary people have never, even heard about, and it comes as a surprise to many to find out that such notable personages the Elizabeth, Queen of England is a member of a number of them, all of which play a big role in shaping the course of events.
Nuclear power generated electricity is particularly hated by the leaders of secret societies, the men the Bible calls “spiritual men who walk in darkness and whose deeds are evil.” The Bible foreshadowed the coming of plague pandemics such as AIDS and SARS, ordained for the world’s “excess” population diminution by these leaders. Nuclear power is hated by the elite because it brings new hope to millions of people who will aspire to a better life once nuclear power is running and available in every city and town throughout the world. The very poor, the downtrodden and the unwanted see new hope in nuclear generated power, as the book goes to some length to explain, the very thing the Illuminati members are so much against. They don’t want an extension of life for those who would otherwise die at a very early age in such countries and India and China.
The book makes it clear that if nuclear power is allowed to reach its full capacity and its full promise, the world will take on a new lease of life that will be of unmatched benefit to all people of all nations. It also makes it clear why there are powerful people who see this as an unmitigated disaster and who will do all in their considerable power to prevent nuclear power coming into full flower.
And here you can see, the energy, mass extermination, totally fraudulent, and illegitimate "energy" solution is being RAMMED through with VIRTUALLY NO ONE PAYING ATTENTION, NOR UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS GOING ON HERE:http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/18/us-wind-idUSTRE73H58E20110418
NEW YORK | Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:25pm EDT
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Google Inc and two Japanese partners will pay General Electric Co about $500 million for a majority equity stake in the world's largest wind farm under construction in Oregon, the partners said on Monday.
The $2 billion Shepherds Flat project, near Arlington, Oregon, is due to be completed next year. It will stretch over 30 square miles of north-central Oregon and generate enough energy for 235,000 U.S. homes.
The site's developer is Caithness Energy.(INSERT: 30 SQUARE MILES, ONLY TO POWER 235,000 HOMES? DOES EVERYONE SEE HOW FRAUDULENT, HOW MUCH OF A NON-SOLUTION THIS IS? You could build a large number of nuclear power plans on that much land area enough to power 1/3 of the U.S. population or more. ONE nuclear reactor site in India would provide power to TEN MILLION homes if it were allowed to be completed, and not false flag sabotaged by the Committee of 300.)
GE said the stake sale was part of its strategy of drawing private investment to the U.S. wind market. GE and Google are partnering with the U.S. unit of Japan's Sumitomo Corp and a unit of Itochu Corp.
Google, Itochu and Sumitomo will together own 56 percent of the total project, reducing GE's equity stake to 34 percent. Caithness will own the balance, GE Energy Financial Services spokesman Andy Katell said.
Itochu and Sumimoto will each win more than 20 percent stakes, Japan's Nihon Keizai Shimbun newspaper reported.
The Shepherds Flat site will eventually use GE 338 turbines and will provide electricity to Southern California Edison, a unit of Edison International.
Sumitomo jointly owns a Texas wind farm with GE and owns wind farms in Japan and China. Itochu partnered with GE on an Oklahoma wind farm.
Measured by its 845-megawatts of capacity, the Oregon site is the world's largest wind farm, Google and GE said.
But one proposed project slated for completion by 2015 is envisioned as housing 1,550 megawatts. That project, headed by Terra-Gen Power LLC, broke ground in July 2010 and will potentially dwarf current leaders E.ON Climate and Renewables' 782 MW facility in Roscoe, Texas, and NextEra Energy's 736 MW Texas complex.
Google said its investment totaled about $100 million, bringing its total investments in the clean energy sector to more $350 million. Earlier this month, it invested in a solar project near Berlin and a solar electric generating system in California's Mojave desert.
"We're excited about helping deliver clean energy to the grid and we hope this latest investment encourages other companies to think about ways they can help accelerate the deployment of more renewable energy," Google's Director of Green Business Operations, Rick Needham, wrote in a company blog.
Google's spending on costly projects seemingly unrelated to its core search business is raising eyebrows on Wall Street.
Last week, that concern turned into consternation after the world's largest search engine revealed a 54-percent surge in first-quarter operating expenses, blamed on pay raises, marketing and other efforts to attract and retain talent as it gears up to battle Facebook.
Wall Street is now worried that new CEO Larry Page will not try to aggressively rein in spending as he pursues expansion into his cherished areas of social networking, mobile, search and other markets.
Some of the company's projects have included self-driving cars, but Google has of late been a heavy investor in renewable energy projects. Most recently, it threw its financial clout behind an ambitious $5 billion proposed electric transmission line intended to jumpstart wind investment along the east coast.
Google shares closed Monday down 0.8 percent on Nasdaq. GE fell 0.4 percent in a down market.
(Reporting by Nick Zieminski, editing by Bernard Orr)
By Tony Munroe
JAITAPUR, India | Fri Apr 15, 2011 11:33am EDT
JAITAPUR, India (Reuters) - As far as Taramati Vaghdhare is concerned, there is no question of accepting compensation to make way for the world's largest nuclear power plant.
"If you want the land, make us stand on the land -- shoot us -- and then take the land," said the feisty 53-year-old, wearing a blue and gold sari and gesturing with a spatula.
In the yard outside her house, a young man sorted green mangoes of the prized Alphonso type from her family's orchards.
"Our land is our mother. We can't sell her and take compensation," said Vaghdhare, who was among villagers detained during recent protests against the plant.
The stakes are high for chronically power-short India. The plant would eventually have six reactors capable of generating 9,900 megawatts of electricity -- enough to provide power to 10 million Indian homes.
Long-running opposition to the proposed plant at Jaitapur has hardened amid the unfolding nuclear crisis in Japan, with village posters depicting scenes of last month's devastation at the Fukushima plant and warning of what could be in store for this region in the Western Ghats north of Goa.
Even if villagers and fishermen manage to derail the plant, India is unlikely to back down from its broader nuclear ambitions given surging power demand and a lack of alternatives.
India suffers from a peak-hour power deficit of about 12 percent that acts as a brake on an economy growing at nearly 9 percent and causes blackouts in much of the country. About 40 percent of Indians, or 500 million people, lack electricity.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh staked his political career on a 2008 deal with the United States that ended India's nuclear isolation dating to its 1974 test of a nuclear device, opening up a $150 billion civilian nuclear market.
India now operates 20 mostly small reactors at six sites with a capacity of 4,780 MW, or 3 percent of its total power capacity. It hopes to lift its nuclear capacity to 7,280 MW by next year, more than 20,000 MW by 2020 and 63,000 MW by 2032 by adding nearly 30 reactors.
Shortly after the earthquake and tsunami that crippled the plant at Fukushima and triggered a global rethink of nuclear power, Singh said India's atomic energy programme was on track but regulators would review safety systems to ensure that plants could withstand similar natural disasters.
"I do not believe that there is any panic reaction in terms of calling for a halt for the nuclear projects," said M.R. Srinivasan, former chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission of India, who selected the Jaitapur site.
"We will certainly review, in respect of new projects, the safety of those sites and the installations we propose to bring there in the context of an extreme, low probability but nonetheless possible natural event such as occurred in Fukushima," he said.
VANDALISM AND CRICKET
A recent visit to the 938 hectare (2,216 acre) site saw few signs of activity other than a group of policemen playing cricket. Defaced signs and milemarkers on the road to Jaitapur, about 300 km (185 miles) south of Mumbai, are evidence of the opposition to the plant.
While the surrounding area is thinly populated, farmers in nearby villages grow cashews, jackfruit and the Alphonso variety of mangoes considered to be the world's best.
About 120 of the 2,370 families eligible for compensation for their land have accepted it, according to Vivek Bhide, a doctor and mango farmer from the district. Community members say they are unified, and those who have accepted compensation are mostly absentee landowners.
Nearby, the bustling fishing port of Sakhri Nate is home to some 600 vessels that bring in about 50,000 kg a day of prawns, squid, kingfish and other species. Residents fear the plant will disrupt access to fishing grounds and raise water temperatures.
"The warm water which will come into the sea will drive away the fish," said Majeed Latigowarkar, a 45-year-old fisherman with a clipped mustache, striped shirt and skullcap.
He said officials have offered electronic gear such as fish-finders and GPS systems in a failed effort to win the support.
"If the government wants to give us something, just give us back our sea," he said.
MANAGING A CRISIS
During a December visit to India by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the two countries signed a framework agreement for state-owned Areva to build two of its next generation 1,650-megawatt EPR reactors at Jaitapur and supply reactor fuel for 25 years in a deal worth 7 billion euros ($10.1 billion).
The Areva reactors would be the first of as many as six at the site, with construction set to start this year and operation to begin by 2018. Final contracts have yet to be signed.
Russia's state-owned Rosatom, meanwhile, plans to build 18 reactors in India, while the General Electric/Hitachi joint venture and the Westinghouse Electric unit of Toshiba are also eyeing opportunities in India.
Opposition to the Jaitapur plant is based in part on worry about seismic activity in the region and concern that India would not be prepared to manage a crisis.
India suffered one of the world's worst industrial accidents in 1984 when about 3,000 people were killed by gas leaks from a Union Carbide factory in Bhopal.
State-run Nuclear Power Corp of India Ltd (NCPIL), which would own and operate the plant, has said no active geological fault is within 30 km (20 miles) of the site.
Critics also say Areva's EPR technology is untested and expensive. No EPR reactors are in operation but four are under construction -- one in France, two in China, and one in Finland, which is three years behind plan and may force Areva to write down as much as 2.6 billion euros ($3.76 billion).
NCPIL has said the price of power from Jaitapur will be competitive.
Whether the Jaitapur plant is built or not, India has little choice but to add a lot more nuclear power.
While numerous thermal power projects are at various stages of development, environmental and land use restrictions mean power producers are having difficulty securing coal, which accounts for 60 percent of India's energy use.
Gas output from the KG basin, for which India has high hopes, has lagged expectations, while competition for imports is intensifying. Alternatives including wind and solar are relatively expensive and lack the scale and storage capacity to provide base load supply.
"We are getting increasingly concerned about India's energy position in the context of supply shortages in most fossil fuels," Kotak Institutional Equities wrote in a recent note.
While New Delhi is committed to nuclear power, India's democratically elected leaders are sensitive to public opinion. China, which is pressing ahead with its own ambitious nuclear programme, is less constrained.
Residents in Jaitapur are encouraged by the long history of civil disobedience in India and say they are bolstered in their argument by the crisis in Japan.
"It only vindicates the doubts, views, we have been raising for the past few years," said Mangesh Chavan, who lives nearby and works in agricultural development, referring to Fukushima.
Last week, activist Anna Hazare ended a five-day hunger strike after the government Delhi gave in to his demand for a tougher anti-graft law.
His campaign drew the support of thousands and comparisons to Mahatma Gandhi's protests and hunger strikes that helped end British colonial rule.
In 2008, farmers in Singur in the state of West Bengal blocked Tata Motors from building a factory there to make it's ultra-low-cost Nano car.
Praveen Gavankar, a farmer and leader of opposition to the nuclear plant, said villagers plan to start farming on the site and if the government tries to block them they are prepared to go to Delhi and stage their own hunger strike.
"We will have to change the government's mind," he said, speaking outside a meeting at a temple in Midgavane village. "The government can't do anything to change our minds."
An old fashioned grid may be inefficient, but it may be easier to secure than a "smart grid". Much of the benefits of a smart grid come from internet connectivity, and that connectivity opens the door to attacks.
Coincidentally Lockheed Martin happens to sell security software.
Lockheed Martin's General Manager of Energy & Cyber Services, Kenneth Van Meter, speaking with green-power site Smart Planet voiced some dire warnings about the United States' push to adopt a "smart grid". According to Mr. Van Meter, the transition poses a glaring threat to the security of the U.S.
He comments, "Right now if I wanted to cut off the power to your house, I’d climb the pole, and there’s a manual switch. Everything’s physical. Once we have a smart grid in place I could do that from China."
"The sheer volume of interactive devices on two-way networks is the biggest risk. By the end of 2015 we will have 440 million new hackable points on the grid. Nobody’s equipped to deal with that today."
When asked about the worse case scenario he remarks:There are three. The one everyone thinks about is the neighborhood kid or someone in another country turning off the power to the neighborhood or the hospital in the middle of night. While no one wants that to happen, it’ll be detected pretty quickly, so it’s not a disaster.
The second potential problem has to do with voltage control. If you want to optimize the amount of power the electrical company has, you want to engage in voltage control, where you have devices along the line from the substation. You can adjust the voltage, everyone gets the right voltage, and everyone’s appliances are running more efficiently. Putting in those devices is expensive, and now those become hackable points–because if you can control them, then someone else can control them. So if your power is out, that would be highly inconvenient. But what if they ran the voltage up and down on your house and when it was fixed, the voltage-sensitive equipment like your computer and high-definition TV didn’t work any more?
Third: If you can cause rapid problems in the grid to occur in the right places at scheduled times, you could destabilize the whole grid, black out whole cities or states and cause massive damage. Sometimes this happens accidentally, but it could also happen because someone makes it happen. Some of the devices are very expensive and therefore there are few spares. Substation-sized transformers, for example, aren’t even made in this country anymore and sometimes it can take two years to get one.
Coincidentally, Mr. Van Meter's company sells security solutions to utilities, so his reason for evangelizing about the smart grid's insecurity may not be purely altruistic. And Lockheed Martin has had its own security woes recently, with Chinese spies reportedly breaking into servers used in the company's F-35 Lightning II fighter project.
Nonetheless, the points raised are largely valid. Virtually every large piece of software (Windows, Linux, OS X, Internet Explorer, Safari, Firefox, Adobe Flash, etc.) created has had vulnerabilities that have been found and exploited. Its unlikely to think that the software that governs the grid will be free of similar vulnerabilities.
A web-connected grid, like Google Grid or Microsoft Hohm, sounds great on paper, but it introduces a pressing need for security, as people from all over the world can now try to attack the power infrastructure remotely. And where a typical cyberattack may merely deny people access to a website, or damage their personal computers, an attack on the grid could literally prove deadly. So Lockheed Martin may be a bit biased, but they're probably right, in this case.
Here they admit that cybersecurity MUST enslave the entire population:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/23/AR2010092306724.html?waporef=obinsite
"At a roundtable with reporters on Wednesday, Alexander advocated creation of a "secure" network for government computer systems and those of critical sectors, such as the power grid.
That strategy - walling off critical computer networks from the rest of the Internet - "is probably where you're going to get to, and it makes a lot of sense," he said.
But some in industry were skeptical.
It would be impractical and "unbelievably expensive," said Joe Weiss
, a cybersecurity expert. who has researched the issue.
"It would be very difficult to try to interconnect all these different companies, including the government," Weiss said. "This isn't just one entity where you walk a wire around Potomac Electric. You have all the neighboring utilities that you need to connect to. You would also have all the other major industrial operations - and with Smart Grid, conceptually, every homeowner. This is not simple."