Search This Blog

Monday, July 30, 2007

FBI/CIA murdered Marilyn Monroe

44 years after Marilyn Monroe's tragic death, just released government documents raise new questions about what really happened.

Marilyn Monroe

July 1962 was a tense time for the United States and the entire world, a period of perilous confrontation between the West and Communist nations. The Soviet Union declared that it would defend China against any attacker. Americans had begun to die in Vietnam. And in tests that month, the U.S. detonated a series of advanced nuclear bombs.

On July 26 an official of the FBI's Domestic Intelligence Division -- the counterespionage department -- filed a cryptic note at headquarters in Washington based on reports from agents in Mexico City: "Info received from informants [names deleted] advised Marilyn Monroe attended a luncheon at the residence of Peter Lawford with President Kennedy. Informants characterized Monroe's views as positively and concisely leftist."

This strange document and others filed under Marilyn Monroe -- Security Matter -- C (the "C" stood for Communist) were to be withheld by the U.S. government for more than 40 years. Behind them lies a disquieting story that began five months earlier in an exotic foreign city.

In February, lounging in a Mexico City hotel suite, the world's most famous movie star had sipped champagne with a scion of one of America's most illustrious families. Marilyn Monroe was getting acquainted with Frederick Vanderbilt Field, great-great-grandson of the railroad tycoon Cornelius Vanderbilt. Monroe had flown south to buy paintings and furniture for her Mexican-style house in California, and Field, who had lived in Mexico for years, was on hand to show her around. An ordinary meeting of the rich and famous? Not so, we now know, as far as the FBI was concerned.

Monroe, as the Bureau already knew, had for some time been having a dalliance with President John F. Kennedy. Three weeks earlier, at a dinner party in Los Angeles, she had also had a first tête-à-tête with his brother Robert, the Attorney General. It was a scenario filled with potential risk, for the woman involved with two of the nation's leaders was drinking too much, abusing prescription drugs and seeing a psychiatrist almost daily.

Her friend Field, meanwhile, was no ordinary plutocrat. He was an unrepentant supporter of communism and was being watched constantly by U.S. agents. Monroe's association with Field, coupled with her involvement with the Kennedys, made her a security risk.

The FBI's July 26 document, made available this year, was written 10 days before Monroe's death.

Back in 1985, when my biography of Monroe was published, I suspected that the authorities had not told the full truth about the actress's final months. Freedom of Information Act requests for documents the FBI might have on the actress turned up the "105" file on her, a designation applied to "foreign intelligence matters." Most of that file, however, was withheld under "B1," an exemption covering matters of national security.

Three years earlier, the office of the Los Angeles County District Attorney had conducted a review of the circumstances of Monroe's death, a probe prompted by continuing public controversy and a claim by a coroner's aide that he had been coerced into signing her death certificate. The D.A.'s investigators, I learned, had been told by the FBI that there was certain material they could not see -- material concerning Monroe's visit to Mexico.

I brought suit against the FBI to release its 105 file, a move that prised out two documents that were almost completely blacked out by the censor's pen. To release the full contents, FBI attorneys asserted, would violate the request of another agency -- almost certainly the CIA -- and compromise sources. Though I moved on to other assignments, I did not give up on the 105 file. Each year, I had my lawyer press the FBI to release the withheld documents.

This past year, the FBI finally provided me with more than 100 pages, this time with far less censorship. Soon after, I obtained some 500 pages from the D.A.'s 1982 case review. Together, the documents throw new light on Monroe's death, one of the most enduring mysteries of the 20th century.

Merylin Monro

Suicide or Murder?

Not long before she died, a D.A.'s report shows, Monroe discussed suicide with an actress friend, Jeanne Carmen. Were she ever to kill herself, she said, she "would dress in a white nightgown, take an overdose of pills and go to bed. The sheets and spread would be white and she would have her hair and makeup done. A friend would be informed of the suicide to make sure that after her death she was neatly positioned and the bedroom was in order."

A shabbier scene greeted police summoned to Monroe's home in Los Angeles in the early hours of August 5, 1962. The star had evidently been dead for some time. She was naked, in a semi-fetal position, her face unmadeup, her hair a mess, in a disordered room. There were pill bottles on the bedside table, and the autopsy report was to give the cause of death as "acute barbiturate poisoning due to ingestion of overdose." In the space for "Mode of Death," autopsy surgeon Dr. Thomas Noguchi circled "Suicide," adding the word "probable." That was the verdict coroner Theodore Curphey announced at a press conference 12 days later, saying he thought the overdose had been "self-administered," the pills swallowed "in one gulp."

Fans thought the suicide finding a slur on Marilyn's character, that her death had been a tragic accident. Others suspected the overdose had been administered by someone else, perhaps by injection -- that their idol had been killed. The D.A.'s 1982 review opened with a formal Request for Investigation of the possible "murder" of "victim Marilyn Monroe" by a person or persons unknown. A mere four months later, though, the probe was closed down. A report was issued stating that there was "no credible evidence supporting a murder theory." There was a possibility that the death had been accidental, but suicide was more likely.

A senior forensic pathologist consulted by the D.A.'s office took the view that the original medical findings on Monroe were accurate. In an interview this year, though, Dr. Steven Karch, a retired assistant medical examiner for the city of San Francisco, pointed out what he sees as troubling flaws in the forensic evidence. Monroe's internist, Dr. Hyman Engelberg, told the D.A.'s investigators that he had prescribed only one of the medications that killed her. If so, asks Karch, where did the other medications come from? The records are contradictory on how the police and coroner's staff handled the many drugs found at the house. A coroner's document indicates that nothing was removed from the scene. The bedside table was still littered with pill bottles the following day; Monroe's business manager, Inez Melson, the first person allowed access after the police left, told me she simply threw them away. Why, then, do other documents indicate that eight medication containers were analyzed at the coroner's laboratory?

Most disquieting is the fate of specimens taken from Monroe's body during the autopsy. When Dr. Noguchi asked the head toxicologist to test tissue samples, he told the D.A.'s staff years later, he was told they had already been "destroyed." Why? Toxicologist Dr. Raymond Abernethy refused to comment when I asked him for an explanation. "The last thing in the world you do is dispose of tissue," Dr. Karch says today. "To throw away the tissue is, I think, astonishingly damning. There's no justification, because you never know when you might want to go back and look again."

naked Merilyn Monroe Given such irregularities, Karch adds, "you can't rule out the possibility that Marilyn Monroe was murdered. If I had my druthers, I would classify this death as 'undetermined causes.' To me -- and I'm not by nature a conspiracy theorist -- the circumstances of her death remain a mystery."

The only other person present in Monroe's house when she died, supposedly, was Eunice Murray, her housekeeper. Questioned by the D.A.'s staff in 1982, Murray said she raised the alarm when -- having woken "in the middle of the night" -- she noticed a telephone cord under Monroe's bedroom door. To avoid being disturbed, the actress usually left the phones outside her room at night, muffled by pillows. The unusual sight of the cord snaking under the door, Murray said, alarmed her enough to call Monroe's psychiatrist.

The psychiatrist, Dr. Ralph Greenson, was dead by 1982, but years earlier he told police that he rushed to the house in response to the housekeeper's call, broke a window to get into Monroe's room, and found her unresponsive. He then phoned her internist, Dr. Engelberg, who hurried to the house. Monroe was "sprawled over the bed," Engelberg told the D.A.'s staff 20 years later. "I took out my stethoscope and listened to make sure her heart wasn't beating ... she was dead. ... I got on the phone and called the police."

The D.A.'s report did not question the credibility of the principal witnesses, did not mention the destruction of forensic specimens, and essentially rubber-stamped the original findings.

Monroe and the Kennedy Brothers

Monroe was drawn to powerful men and keenly interested in politics. She had had an on-off dalliance with John Kennedy since before his election in 1960 and met Robert just before her 1962 Mexico trip, at the Santa Monica home of the brothers' sister Pat and her actor husband Peter Lawford. Knowing Robert would be present, she brought with her a prepared list of political talking points, which they discussed at length. "Bobby was enthralled," recalled guest Joan Braden, and soon Monroe was talking about the "new man in my life." She identified him to one friend only as "the General" because, she coyly explained, he was a prominent public figure. "The General" was how Justice Department insiders spoke of Robert Kennedy. The President's brother and the actress began exchanging phone calls, as Robert's secretary Angie Novello has confirmed. Robert visited Monroe at home in California, according to several sources, including the FBI's former Los Angeles agent-in-charge, Bill Simon, who more than once lent Kennedy his Cadillac convertible to "go see Marilyn."

The D.A.'s review dealt cursorily with stories about Robert and Monroe, pouring scorn on a claim that the Attorney General visited Monroe on the day of her death. "There is no evidence that he was in Los Angeles," a report noted, and newspapers placed him in San Francisco that weekend. In fact, from Friday evening to late Sunday, Kennedy was on a ranch owned by a political supporter 60 miles south of San Francisco. From there, authoritative sources indicate, he indeed made a trip to Los Angeles.

Daryl Gates, who in 1962 was an aide to the Los Angeles police chief -- he went on to head the force himself -- is one such source. "Our records show that [Kennedy] was in Los Angeles," he said this year. Several other senior police officers have said the same. One of the 1982 D.A. investigators told me that John Dickey, a Deputy D.A. in Los Angeles in 1962, said he, too, was told the Attorney General was in Los Angeles on Monroe's last day alive. Ward Wood, a Lawford neighbor, told me he saw Robert Kennedy arrive at the Lawford house that "late afternoon or early evening," by car.

Several people, including Monroe's housekeeper, claimed that at some point that day the President's brother did go to Monroe's home.

We know Monroe had several phone conversations during her final hours. Two of them appear to have been highly significant. A young scriptwriter she met in Mexico, José Bolaños, told me he phoned her sometime after 9 p.m. Monroe told him, he said, "something that will one day shock the whole world." I pressed him, but he would not elaborate.

At about 9:30 p.m. Monroe called Sydney Guilaroff, doyen of Hollywood hairdressers and a confidant of several stars. When I interviewed him for my book, he, like Bolaños, refused to reveal what she had said. Before his death in 1997, however, Guilaroff, in a little-noticed memoir, wrote that Monroe had sounded frantic. She had told him: " ‘Robert Kennedy was here, threatening me, yelling at me … I'm having an affair with him … I had an affair with JFK as well.' She said that Robert Kennedy had journeyed to Los Angeles that afternoon not merely to break off his own affair but to warn Monroe about ever phoning the White House again. ‘It's over,' he had told her. ... Now Marilyn was sobbing on the phone. 'I'm frightened … I know a lot of secrets about what has gone on in Washington. ... Dangerous ones.' "

That the brothers should have wanted to cut off contact with Monroe is no surprise. Dallying with her had been foolhardy from the start. Both were married men in an age when adultery by public figures was even more perilous than it is today. Their folly was compounded by the fact that they apparently talked too much when with Monroe. The 1982 investigators gave some attention to a claim that Monroe kept a journal in which she scribbled notes about her conversations with Robert Kennedy on subjects such as his crusade against the Mafia, his efforts to put Teamster leader Jimmy Hoffa behind bars, and the confrontation with Fidel Castro's Cuba. The D.A.'s report quoted associates saying they had seen no such diary and doubted whether -- in her final months especially -- Monroe was capable of keeping one.

Yet no fewer than seven people, including Monroe's friends and two reporters, are on record as saying the actress did habitually make notes in a diary. One was Jeanne Carmen, the girlfriend with whom Monroe discussed her scenario for suicide. In a memo summarizing an interview with Carmen -- omitted entirely from the 1982 report -- an investigator wrote: "Monroe informed Carmen that Robert Kennedy made numerous business telephone calls from Monroe's residence. Monroe was aware of Kennedy's plans regarding Castro and apparently wrote them in a diary. ... One evening Kennedy, Carmen and Monroe were at Monroe's apartment when Kennedy discovered the diary. He examined it and became upset. He told Monroe she should never put anything in writing and to throw the diary away. Carmen doesn't know what Monroe did with the diary."

Political Entanglements

If the notebook posed a threat, Monroe's loose lips posed an even greater one. Evidence of that comes from the FBI file on Monroe's February 1962 visit to Mexico, the file that neither the D.A. nor I were allowed to see back in the '80s. What we now have of it shows why it was considered sensitive.

Monroe had spent 10 days in Mexico, shopping, socializing and drinking too much. It appeared to be a harmless vacation trip, but on March 6, four days after Monroe got back to Los Angeles, the senior FBI official in Mexico sent Director J. Edgar Hoover a four-page report. Quoting two unnamed people close to her, it said that Monroe had "associated closely with certain members of the American Communist Group in Mexico ... present and/or past members of the Communist Party, U.S.A., and their friends and associates who share a common sympathy for Communism and the Soviet Union … during the course of this visit a mutual infatuation arose between subject [Monroe] and Frederick Vanderbilt Field ... [source's name deleted] said it was obvious that the subject was completely enamored with Field. She said that subject thinks that Field is rich, stable, intellectual, and dependable."

Field, who was married, made no mention of having had a fling with Monroe, either in his published memoir or in interviews with me. He did say his impression was that "sexually, Marilyn did a fair amount of one-night stands." Whether or not he and Monroe were "enamored," it is clear that they took to each other at once. Field had long espoused Communist doctrine and was by his own account "a good, unrebellious comrade."

Monroe seemed to gravitate to left-wingers. Her doctors, psychiatrist Greenson and internist Engelberg, had both been involved with the Communist Party. Her housekeeper's brother-in-law Churchill Murray, who introduced Monroe to diplomats in Mexico, was a member of the group of Communists in exile there. Field deemed Monroe's politics "excellent." She was of the left, odd though it may seem to a public that recalls only the blond bimbo of her movies. Her psychiatrist's daughter, Joan Greenson, told me that Monroe was "passionate about equal rights, rights for blacks, rights for the poor. She identified strongly with the workers." The FBI, a document shows, deemed her to be "very positively and concisely leftist."

While in Mexico, the FBI learned, Monroe chattered about the night she met Robert Kennedy and the long political conversation they had. She told José Bolaños and Field that they had debated U.S. policy on Cuba.

No foreign policy issue was more sensitive than Cuba in early 1962. The Cuban missile crisis was only months away. Robert Kennedy was directing secret American attempts to overthrow Castro, and anything he said on the subject would have been of interest to the Cubans and the Soviets. Some of the American Communists in Mexico City, the new documents indicate, were in touch with Soviet-bloc embassies.

Two weeks after the report on Monroe reached FBI headquarters, on March 22, Director J. Edgar Hoover went to the White House to talk to President Kennedy. At least in part, Assistant Director Cartha DeLoach remembered, Hoover's purpose was to warn Kennedy about his womanizing. Kennedy was not readily deterred.

According to credible witnesses, he slept with Monroe two days later, during a weekend break near Palm Springs.

In the following weeks, Monroe continued to have contacts with the Kennedy brothers and also -- by phone -- with Field. She stayed on the West Coast but invited Field to use her Manhattan apartment for a visit that summer. All the while, the files show, FBI agents were tracking Field wherever he went.

On July 13, J. Edgar Hoover received a bombshell report from Mexico. Two sources -- the names are redacted -- reported on what Monroe told them: "She had luncheon at the Peter Lawfords with President Kennedy just a few days previously. She was very pleased, as she had asked the President a lot of socially significant questions concerning the morality of atomic testing."

July had seen the first known detonation of an H-bomb on U.S. territory, and more tests followed; Robert Kennedy, with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at his side, witnessed one of them. Anything Monroe passed on about what the Kennedys said privately on the subject would have been of interest to the Communist side. Nothing in the available record shows that Hoover warned the brothers of Monroe's indiscretions, but it would have been extraordinary had he failed to do so. And it would also have been extraordinary if the Kennedys did not, at that point -- just three weeks before her death -- move to sever their connection with Monroe once and for all.

When she was found dead, according to her psychiatrist, Monroe had a phone "clutched fiercely in her right hand." Whom had she been calling as she slipped into unconsciousness? Los Angeles chief of detectives Thad Brown told Virgil Crabtree, the U.S. Treasury's assistant chief of intelligence in Los Angeles, that a White House number, scrawled on a piece of crumpled paper, had been found in the dead woman's bedclothes. "It was determined," Brown's aide, Inspector Kenneth McCauley, told me, "that she had called John Kennedy just before she died."

That last evening, President Kennedy was in Cape Cod enjoying a break. The White House switchboard, though, could patch calls through to him wherever he was. The Presidential phone log shows that early the following morning, at 9:04 East Coast time -- 6:04 on the West Coast -- Kennedy took a call from Peter Lawford in California. The two men talked for some time.

Robert Kennedy, back at his friend's ranch, spent the day horse riding and playing football. News of Monroe's death came up, his host remembered, but was discussed "lightly, in a sort of amusing way."

Former BBC journalist Anthony Summers is the author of seven nonfiction books including "Goddess: The Secret Lives of Marilyn Monroe."


There is no credible evidence available that would lead to the conclusion that RFK had engaged in an affair with Monroe or that the Kennedys had her killed in order to silence her.,0724-5.htm

Monroe dead.

Fascist groups within the CIA killed Marilyn to expose the scandal and possibly frame Robert and John Kennedy. After their plot failed, they decided on more drastic measures against the Kennedys, which eventually led to Dallas and Los Angeles.

"I don't trust those guys at the CIA. They're worse than the Mafia." RFK

Anti Fundamenalist Jewish Chauvinism

Thanks to an article of blind hatred against Chomsky I was pointed to
authors I hadn't know til now:

Israel Shahak and Tanya Reinhart

Israel Shahak, (*April 28, 1933 – + July 2, 2001) was a Polish-born
Israeli Professor of Chemistry at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, the
former president of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights, and an
outspoken critic of the Israeli government and of Israeli society in
general. Shahak's writings on Judaism have been the source of considerable

Shahak reports having been radicalized first by the Suez War and his
feeling of betrayal by David Ben-Gurion's push to occupy the Sinai
Peninsula, and then through his experiences in the United States. In the
1960s he became involved in the Israeli League Against Religious Coercion.
Following the Six-Day War of 1967, he disavowed his former affiliation
with the Israeli League against Religious Coercion, believing them to be
"fake liberals" who used liberal principles to fight religious influence
in Israeli society, but failed to use those same principles to fight
Israeli treatment of Palestinians. Shahak instead joined the Israeli
League for Human and Civil Rights, was elected president of the League in
1970. That same year he established the Committee Against Administrative

He began publishing translations of the Hebrew press into English,
alongside his own commentaries, arguing that Western activists needed
better knowledge about conditions in Israel, and that the English-language
editions of Hebrew newspapers were being intentionally distorted for
Western audiences. This practice, along with writing letters to the
editor, remained staples of his work for decades.

He became a well-known activist in international circles, co-authoring
papers and giving joint speaking engagements with American activist Noam
Chomsky, and winning plaudits from Christopher Hitchens and Edward Said.

Reviewer Sheldon Richman explains that for Shahak, Zionism was both a
reflection of, and capitulation to, European anti-Semitism, "since it,
like the anti-Semites, holds that Jews are everywhere aliens who would
best be isolated from the rest of the world."[5]

In 1994 he published Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three
Thousand Years, in 1997 he published Open Secrets: Israel's Nuclear and
Foreign Policies, and in 1999 he published Jewish Fundamentalism In
Israel, co-authored with Norton Mezvinsky. In the introduction to the
latter book, Mezvinksy and Shahak explained that, "We realize that by
criticizing Jewish fundamentalism we are criticizing a part of the past
that we love. We wish that members of every human grouping would criticize
their own past, even before criticizing others."

In 1994 Shahak published Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight Of
Three Thousand Years. In it he proposes that most nations' histories are
initially ethnocentric. However they then evolve through a period of
critical self-analysis to incorporate other perspectives. This, he argues,
largely hasn't happened with Jewish history.

Shahak alleges that Talmudic Judaism is a totalitarian religion where
rabbinical law governs every aspect of Jewish behaviour.[11] He also
claims that these laws result in religious chauvinism and thereby govern
Jewish thought.[citation needed] This, according to Shahak, has two
important consequences:
Attempts by Western analysts to explain contemporary Israeli politics in
purely secular terms such as imperialism are fundamentally flawed.
More controversially, that 'Jewish chauvinism' can be a causal factor in
anti-Semitism, and that both must be fought simultaneously.

Shahak also analyses the period from the beginning of the last millennium
(CE) to the advent of the modern state when most Jews lived under
rabbinical law in segregated communities. These communities, writes
Shahak, were under the patronage of non-Jewish nobles who typically used
them to enforce their authority on a non-Jewish peasant class. Rebellions
by such peasants in which all feudal agents were attacked, Shahak argues,
have wrongly been perceived as anti-Jewish persecutions. Consequently, he
calls for significant parts of Jewish history to be re-evaluated from a
universal perspective.

Shahak also claims that Zionism is an attempt to re-establish a closed
Jewish community and that this has resulted in discrimination against
non-Jews. He concludes the book by stating, "Although the struggle against
antisemitism (and of all other forms of racism) should never cease, the
struggle against Jewish chauvinism and exclusivism, which must include a
critique of classical Judaism, is now of equal or greater importance."


Tanya Reinhart, (July 1943 – March 17, 2007) was an Israeli linguist who
wrote frequently on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. She contributed
columns to the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot and longer articles to
the CounterPunch, Znet, and Israeli Indymedia websites.

Reinhart studied philosophy and Hebrew literature at the Hebrew
University, Jerusalem as an undergraduate, where she later received an
M.A. in comparative literature and philosophy. In 1976 she obtained a
Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Her thesis
supervisor was Noam Chomsky.

Reinhart was a former professor of linguistics and literary theory at
Tel-Aviv University. She was also a guest lecturer at Utrecht University
in the Netherlands, and ended her international career as Distinguished
Global Professor at New York University (NYU).

Reinhart was an outspoken critic of Israel's policies in the 1967-occupied
territories. She argued that Israel should abandon the West Bank and Gaza:
Israel should withdraw immediately from the territories occupied in 1967.
The bulk of Israeli settlers (150,000 of them) are concentrated in the big
settlement blocks in the center of the West bank. These areas cannot be
evacuated over night. But the rest of the land (about 90%–96% of the West
bank and the whole of the Gaza strip) can be evacuated immediately. Many
of the residents of the isolated Israeli settlements that are scattered in
these areas are speaking openly in the Israeli media about their wish to
leave. It is only necessary to offer them reasonable compensation for the
property they will be leaving behind. The rest — the hard-core "land
redemptions" fanatics — are a negligible minority that will have to accept
the will of the majority. [2]

Reinhart pointed out that immediate withdrawal would still leave under
debate between six and ten percent of the West Bank with the large
settlement blocks, as well as the issues of Jerusalem and the right of
return, and maintains that these should be the subject of "serious peace

In 2002, Reinhart was heavily criticized in Israel for signing a European
petition calling for a moratorium on European support of Israeli academia
in protest of Israel's Palestinian policies.

The same year, she also published a book, Israel/Palestine: How To End the
War of 1948, in which she analyzed what she saw as the breakdown during
the preceding three years of constructive engagement over the Palestinian
issue and the hardening of the Israeli position.

In December 2006, Reinhart moved to New York saying she could no longer
live in Israel due to its treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied

Tanya Reinhart was married to Israeli writer Aharon Shabtai. She has been
described as a post-Zionist

Fallen soldier, against the war and Bush, joined Army anyway

The Associated Press

Article Launched: 07/29/2007 06:23:22 AM PDT

========= NEWS ===============

RIALTO, Calif.—Victor A. Garcia didn't support President Bush and thought
the Iraq war was wrong.

(only logical)

Yet he joined the Army anyway, looking for some help with college tuition
and perhaps some discipline. The specialist was assigned to the 1st
Battalion, 38th Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division
(Stryker Brigade Combat Team) at Ft. Lewis, Wash.

(poverty draft?)

On July 1, he was killed in Baghdad when his unit was attacked with
small-arms fire.

(killed by who? Like Pat Tillman by his own people for reading chomsky
and causing insurmaountable cognitive dissonance?)

Garcia, 22, was the son of Mexican immigrants.

(Illegal immigrants, maybe? $3 per our orange pickers maybe?)

His brothers, Abel and Daniel, married their high school sweethearts at a
young age. Victor knew many girls, but had no girlfriend.

(human interest stories are often employed to distract from important
questions that the corporate press cannot answer, check

for a
great speech on the subject of INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT by PILGER)

"Victor just wanted to get out and see the world," Daniel Garcia said.
"Victor was the one destined to do a lot more."

(sure he was! What else did he say that is not fit to print?)

He was an avid sports fan and loved the Atlanta Braves, San Francisco
49ers and Manchester United soccer club in England.

(like any male grwoing up in a society where sports is the only place
where people play by the rules)

He read books by leftist critic Noam Chomsky. One of his blog entries on
his MySpace .com page wonders, "What more evidence do we need?" that the
war was a mistake.

(Cannot be found
... infuriating inaccurate reporting.. why don't they just give the link?)

Besides his mother and brothers, Garcia is survived by his father and a

(and Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Henry Hugh Shelton, Myers and and

Saturday, July 28, 2007

Iraq war veteran and experienced demolitions expert blows the cover on 9/11 inside job.

Iraq war veteran and experienced demolitions expert blows the cover on 9/11 inside job.

Written by Gibbwake

Meet Torin Wolf. He has a broad and varied background as a US Army Combat Nurse during Operation Iraqi Freedom,....

...building construction contractor, certified structural welder, certified asbestos and hazardous materials worker, experienced demolitions expert, teacher, radio show host, and well studied 9/11 truth activist. Torin knows how to put a building up, and bring the same building down in its own footprint. Torin's free presentation, “Taking the Red Pill” was hosted by Brave New Books on 1904 Guadalupe in Austin last Saturday, June 23rd at 7 pm.

Torin is proud of his native Cherokee heritage and his mother is the Band Historian of the White River Band Cherokee from the central United States. Since he received his GED at age 14, saying he is a smart guy is putting it lightly. For over 12 years he worked as a hazardous materials contractor specializing in asbestos abatement and concrete construction sampling. Add to his resume the fact that he designed and implemented well over 100 controlled demolitions. He was not just helping at a lower level in the demolitions - he was the guy responsible for calling the shots. Afterwards, he became a certified structural steel welder and worked in heavy and mega construction for over 5 years in locations around the world including several skyscrapers.

Ironically, Torin signed his papers to join the army on September 11th, 2000. He knew something was wrong with the official 9/11 story when his army handlers took his squad into a room just in time to watch the buildings collapse. With his demolitions experience, he immediately knew those towers could not have fallen like that without explosives. He went on to serve “with honor and distinction” with the 21st Combat Support Hospital in Mosul, Iraq during the first part of Operation Iraqi Freedom and earned the Bronze Star with V device for valor in combat.

While saving over 120 lives, Torin earned the Combat Medical Badge by providing medical care to US, allied, enemy soldiers, and civilians under combat conditions. Torin's arms display Samoan life saving tattoos, each line and symbol representing a group of lives saved. The army would like you to think he wasn't in Iraq, but unfortunately for them, Torin appears in a recent documentary filmed there. A true hero helping save lives in the middle east, Torin can be seen in section 4 of a PBS documentary called “Life and Death in the War Zone.”

With Torins impressive list of qualifications, his unwavering voice holds a power that shatters the lies of 9/11 sold to us by the government and mainstream media, “The official story we've been told about 9/11 is absolutely, physically impossible.”

Those words are not just backed up with his qualifications because his presentation goes through the hard physics as well. The presentation starts out with a serious warning that reminds us the state our country is in after the false flag attack and ensuing tyrannical hijacking of the government on that September morning. A hijacking not by Bin Laden, not by Al Qeada, but by a group of tyrants that orchestrated and benefited from 9/11. “Unless you want to be charged as a terrorist, I suggest you leave the room now. This is technically seditious material and you can be charged under section 802 of the Patriot Act just for being here.”

This upsets a few people near the front row. Everyone looks around to see if that will scare anyone off but luckily no one leaves and the presentation continues. The bookstore is now filled with former American citizens, now terrorists, simply because they want to learn the truth of what happened on 9/11. If you think the patriot act only applies to foreigners or dehumanized muslims with brown skin, you are very wrong. Torin rubs the effect in even more, “We [American citizens] don't even have to be charged – foreigners do.” Then tells us that the patriot act was written prior to 9/11, “This is admitted.” Also admitted is the fact that the patriot act has been used to come after American citizens over eight hundred times.

The presentation moves on and goes through some of the just plain crazy theories of why the towers fell, such as space beams, holograms, missiles, orbs, pterodactyls, etc., and easily debunks them. Torin then adds, “There is evidence most of these are put out by the government as disinfo.” Then explains how the White House, in violation of the law, has bought 28 billion, “Billion with a B” in fake news.

“But the craziest, most truly unhinged conspiracy theory for the towers falling on 9/11?” Torin asks rhetorically. “Fire.” The official story cannot be recreated by any experiment. NIST is the government agency involved in attempting to model what happened to the world trade center on 9/11, and they fail horribly. NIST never models what happens after the collapse initiation, and even what they do model before that is easily debunked. NIST created 16 separate physics programs to simulate the WTC 1 & 2 collapses and only got 1 to collapse partially. Torin adds, “When they did, [in the computer model] they removed 40% of the structural support.” The cross trusses that the towers received a significant amount of their strength from had to be removed to have a collapse in the computer simulation. Torin then mocks the official story, “There's no such thing as a 'pancake' collapse, but there is a progressive collapse”

A few slides are shown of progressive collapses throughout the world. None of them are anything like what happened to the world trade center with its pulverized concrete 100 microns or smaller just seconds after the start of collapse, and then its complete destruction. Torin uses his expertise to explain to the audience how and why a real progressive collapse occurs and subsequently why the WTC was not a progressive collapse. “The biggest problem with the argument,” Torin explains. “Time.”

Several slides are then presented that show the hard physics and observed time of WTC 2 falling. Worst-case scenario would require 0.5 seconds per floor for collapse. “The absolute minimum amount of time for a progressive collapse would be 43 seconds.” How long did it take for the building to fall in reality? About 8.6 Seconds.

“For the towers to fall at so close to free fall speed, over 110,000 separate and independent structural support points had to fail simultaneously. 'Pancake theory' does NOT explain the failure of the cores.” Torin explains passionately, obviously upset with the lies being told to the American people. "Nothing is holding the building up - No resistance. 110,000 structural failures at the same time."

Torin: "Nothing is holding the building up - No resistance. 110,000 structural failures at the same time."

Next, we are shown an incredible bit of detective work on Torins part. He shows a sequence of 12 different pictures of the collapse initiation of the North tower, WTC 1. Torin explains that the antenna on the top of the world trade center is a perfect guide of measurement for height, as there is a standard of changing the paint color of antennas once per fifty feet. The part of the antenna on the roof of WTC 1 appears black, then white alternated every fifty feet. There is a guide wire in the bottom left of every picture that shows that the camera does not move. Why is this picture so interesting? It shows the antenna, which is held up by the core columns, fall before the rest of the building while the fire line on the 78th floor doesn't move. Torin then goes through the hard physics of the scene we're looking at and explains how it directly contradicts the official story, “This building is not collapsing on the 78th floor. The antenna falls 56 feet before the 78th floor falls.”

Torin then gives his expert analysis on building 7 for about five minutes. For those that are new to this information, building 7 was the third building to collapse on 9/11. After a thirty second countdown was given by firefighters, it collapsed perfectly into its own footprint at 5:20 in the afternoon. It housed the IRS, Department of Defense, CIA, Secret Service, and the Security and Exchange Commission among many others. While I can't cover all of the hard hitting information Torin brought up about building 7, the highlight was his analysis of the collapse, which played over and over again on the screen behind him, “There is no doubt about it, this is a controlled demolition profile” then Torin directed everyone to view the kink, which is characteristic of a controlled demolition.

Dangerously high levels of asbestos, lead, PCB’s, mercury, radioactive materials, and powdered concrete were in the air after the towers were demolished. Much to the surprise of many audience members, we learned from Torin that by far the most dangerous on the list was the pulverized concrete. The pulverized concrete, which was thick in the air around ground zero after the collapses of WTC 1 and 2, had a pH of 12 which is “about the same as drain cleaner.” This pH level, when breathed in and gets wet in your lungs, will cause chemical burns. “Wet concrete can burn you,” Torin adds. The asbestos is bad, but that will kill you over 20 years - the powdered concrete will kill much faster. So its no surprise to learn that all of the 9/11 rescue and recovery dogs are dead.

Torins report goes on to explain how “emissions from the WTC piles were recorded to be hundreds of times above the legal Permissible Exposure Limit as established by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health for more than 2 weeks after 9/11.” Sheer contempt of Christine Todd Whitman, head of the EPA is expressed next by Torin. Torin is rightly angry at her for saying the air was safe to breathe and that people should return to work, even though they refused to release the data from their testing at that time to substantiate their declaration. Torin uncovers that, “The EPA didn’t begin monitoring for airborne asbestos levels until 8:00pm September 14, 2001 – a day and a half after they told everyone that it was safe to return.” Torin then cites the exact law that the EPA is violating and the number of regulatory duties that are violated as well. Torin has caught the EPA in direct violation of a federal law, punishable by up to 10 years in prison as well as a $250,000 fine for each violation. Before the EPA did the tests, independent tests were done in which the machines that do the air quality testing “were so full of junk that they couldn't be read.” If that is the case, Torin adds, “You must, by law, throw the sample out.”

What was in the readable air samples? “Sampling of bulk materials and dust found generally low levels of asbestos.” Since Torin has worked with hazardous materials for over 12 years specializing in asbestos abatement, he knows quite a bit about the industry. “There is no such thing as a 'low level of asbestos'. Bulk samples, by Federal law, either are (>1%) or are not (<1%)> Bottom line, the EPA failed to perform its duties in regards to 9/11 and actively encouraged people to enter an unsafe area containing hazardous materials. As anyone working in the asbestos industry, Torin wanted to land the contract to clean the asbestos in the World Trade Center, “We all wanted the contract – you could clean a small section, sell the contract, and retire.” It was known in the industry as basically a goldmine of an asbestos abatement job, a contract worth over 3 billion dollars. Instead, the owner of the World Trade Center complex, “Lucky” Larry Silverstein actually made billions through insurance purchased before the towers destruction.

A critical slide in the presentation of Rudolph Giuliani is displayed next. It should be noted that Giuliani agreed with Christine Todd Whitman that the air at ground zero was safe. Giuliani was appointed U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York in 1983. “So he knew a thing or two about criminal investigation procedures,” Torin adds. Knowing that, one has to wonder why he “sent more than 99% of the steel from the WTC to China and Korea in violation of proper chain of evidence.” Not only that, it was sent overseas at a price undercutting a New Jersey company. A company in New Jersey offered to pay $0.56 per ton, but it was sent out of the country to be smelted before experts could analyze the steel for signs of explosives for $0.50 per ton. Giuliani is clearly one of the perpetrators behind the crimes of 9/11, and he was confronted recently by a truth squad led by Luke Rudkowski. They wanted to know why his story has changed five times about his activities on the morning of 9/11.

So what does Torin think took down the WTC buildings? Different forms of thermite, such as thermate and one called super thermite. “If I was demolishing a building as high as the WTC, I would use thermite. It does what I want, when I want.” Torin then gets into the science of thermite, and what its actual chemical composition is. The same chemical composition found in the previously molten metal microspheres found in the WTC dust, discovered by professor Steven Jones. “The WTC 'microsphere' samples showed the presence of aluminum (Al), magnesium (Mg), manganese (Mn), potassium (K), copper (Cu), and sulphur (S).” Torins explanation continues, “The presence of sulphur in steel makes it brittle and lowers its melting point. Sulphur is NOT used in structural steel because of this. Powdered iron oxide (Fe2O4) and aluminum in equal parts make a compound called thermite. Add sulphur to thermite and you have a compound called thermate which is used in heavy demolition.”

Torin then explains super thermite, “Add potassium permanganate (KMnO4) and cupric sulphide (CuSO4) to thermate and you have something called 'Super Thermite' which is explosive and used in mega-demolition, such as WTC 1 & 2.” For obviously criminal reasons, “NIST refuses to comment on the presence of Al, Mg, S, K, or Cu in the samples.” Torin finalizes the evidence of explosives with statements made from numerous firefighters and reporters at ground zero such as Capt. Karin DeShore of the New York Fire Department, “Somewhere around the middle of the World Trade Center [WTC 1] there was this orange and red flash. Initially it was just one, then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode… These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building.” Torin explains, “That is a controlled demolition profile she is describing.”

Torin: "Save it why? Because its a demolition angle"

So who isn't wanted for the crimes of 9/11? Gasps were heard from the audience as information relating to former paid CIA operative Tim Osman having no involvement in the crimes of 9/11. Tim Osman was Osama Bin Ladens CIA codename. New evidence has been released in the past month showing how the federal government allowed planes personally chartered by none other than Osama himself to get friends and family out of the country after 9/11. A quote from Osamas FBI page shows that he is in fact, not wanted for involvement in the crimes of that day. Torin shows a quote from the FBI director at the time, Robert Mueller, saying that there is “no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers." Well sourced evidence is then shown from multiple mainstream news articles proving that many of the hijackers are still alive. The official story does not add up.

The strongest part of Torins presentation is saved for the end, the aftermath of 9/11. A bleak picture is shown of the results of the false flag attack. An invasion of Afghanistan that was on Bush's desk two days before 9/11, over 655,000 admitted dead in the spreading war in the middle east, cheap heroin out of Afghanistan that the former Taliban government destroyed, soon to be full scale war in Iran, several thousand dead troops, and an oppressive police state at home being enforced by some of the returning aggravated felons that were doing the same in Iraq. “We are not deprogrammed after battle,” Torin explains when covering the mental aspects of war.

Torins insight as a combat nurse reveals that the actual amount of dead troops numbers around 15,000-17,000, not the 3,500 we have been told. “If you get shot in combat – Bam! Clock goes off. If you die in transit [to a hospital out of Iraq such as Ramstein in Germany] you are not an official Iraq casualty.” The same holds true if the troops out of the country die 24 hours after they were hit in Iraq. The official troop death number is just those that have died in action on the ground.

We are then shown that legally, “terrorist” is a term that can be branded on virtually anyone. “If you have ever thought of spanking your child, running a red light, or made someone angry then, by this definition, you are a terrorist!” And if you are charged as a terrorist, you will be tried in a military court. With the power slanted against you in a military court, the Hamdi v. Rumsfeld case showed us that you do not even have to be released if found not guilty. This is a lot to swallow when you realize that “such persons are subject to indefinite imprisonment without charges, legal representation, or any of the other protections guaranteed by the Constitution,” Torins slide explains. Then the definition of domestic terrorism is shown, and we all learn that by this definition, not wearing your seatbelt, jaywalking, speeding, or spitting on the sidewalk is a terrorist act.

Fliers are shown next that originated out of the Department of Homeland Security and the Phoenix, Arizona FBI office. These are shown to policing agencies around the country. Torin explains how nearly all of the groups encompass normal citizens who have done no wrong such as Torins favorite, “Lone Individuals - If you don't fit in any group, this is it.”

After a brief question and answer, Torin ends the presentation with a fitting quote from Thomas Jefferson, “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.” A true patriot and truth activist, Torin is dissenting to expose the lies and crimes of our government in order to get it back from the tyrannical, criminal group sitting in power now and to return to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. If you want to join Torin in this fight or ask him a question, he can be heard every Saturday and Sunday on the We The People Radio Network from 12 to 2 pm central. After his radio show, you can join him in person with an Austin 9/11 truth squad, getting the word out on the south steps of the state capital on Congress avenue every Saturday. This article is only just a few highlights of Torins presentation, so don't miss the one next month at Brave New Books.

by Gibbwake. Gibb can be contacted at

Friday, July 27, 2007

Cartoons about USA Iraq Occupation

Ted Rall -- Profile of a suicide bomber

Fighting in Iraq -- cartoon

We are fighting in Iraq so we don't have to fight here.
Similarly, we should get rid of Social Security in Iraq so we don't have to get rid of it here.
Let's also run up Iraq's national debt so we don't have to run up ours.
Are you going to Iraq? Because it would be better if we didn't have to have you here!
30 june 2007 Ted Rall RALL.COM

Evolution of the Left - cartoon

Evolution of the Left

Unconditional basic income

This page has been automatically translated.

I trust you have seen SiCKO (download it here) and the social benefits of living on a non-militarised society like France or Italy (6 weeks paid holidays plus 10 paid public holidays, universal healthcare etc etc) . Of course this seems totally outlandish to USA elites. These benefits in the USA are only afforded to the top-employees at great cost. The average working person in the USA would consider the french social benefits as paradise ... and if asked will not consider it possible in the USA. In Germany, society wants to evolve yet further. Check this out:

An unconditional basic income (BGE) is an socialeconomic model, in which each citizen receives a legally specified and financial allowance (transfer service), same for each citizen, from the state, whose height is sufficient to the existence safety device and must for no return be furnished.

To the models of a BGE discussed in Germany the solidary citizen money or existing building model, the Ulmer model or the model of Götz Werner e.g. belongs.

General concept

The BGE represents a taxfinanced income for everything, which is to secure the existence and social sharing, without an socialadministrative means test taken place and without a readiness for the work is demanded.

The BGE is thus a form of the citizen money (basic income). Another form is the negatives income tax, which usually presupposes the readiness for the acceptance of an offered work. The BGE differs from a nationally organized basic safety device, which is only paid, if no other sufficient income is available, and which is connected with a means test.

Depending upon model a payment at height of the social welfare assistance rate and/or the unemployment pay II is suggested up to a payment by 1.500 euro per month. [1] Who would like to have more moneys, this could earn itself still e.g. by acquisition work - there would be only no more existenzielle necessity to the acquisition work.

For financing usually a strong simplification and re-organization of the control system are intended as well as very much less expenditure and bureaucracy in the social administration, since past transfer services were replaced by the BGE. Unemployment pay, social welfare assistance, pension, child benefit and similar social security benefits replaced by the unconditional basic income gradually and finally to be omitted.


Concrete concepts for a guaranteed basic income out-formulated of Joseph Carlier (Solution OF the Social Question. Brussels 1848) and Josef Popper Lynkeus (the general feeding obligation as solution of the social question. Leipzig 1912). In Austria the first suggestion was well-being-called by Lieselotte and submitted Herwig Büchele. Into the 1920er years developed Scottish engineer Clifford Hugh Douglas an economic theory named Social Credit. The designation comes from Douglas' desire to achieve social progress by the money system. Its ideas were very popular during the world economic crisis, were however never converted. Bertrand Russell pleaded 1932 in praise of the idle course for a basic income.

1980 published Robert Anton Wilson in its book the Illuminati of papers the RICH economics, [2] with which it a 4-Step-Plan for the introduction of a basic income suggest. Wilson argued thereby that humans would aim at „a multi-with few doing “, what it with the word Ephemerisierung describes. This term comes from Richard Buckminster Fuller, likewise which employed considerations in its book Critical Path (1981) to an unconditional basic income. Unemployment is based directly on the technical possibility of these Ephemerisierung. Work for wages is a modern form of the slavery. Wilson states in addition Aristoteles, which said that slavery could be abolished only if machines were built, which avail themselves. Wilson continues to call also which 1947 pointed out Norbert Viennese, a joint founder of the cybernetics, that the progress in the computer engineering will release mass unemployment.

Also the French social philosopher André Gorz assumes that. For centuries ever more work by machines are taken over. The rise of the productivity caused thereby leads to the fact that even with increasing production less manpower is needed. The conception of full employment becomes the illusion. Therefore Gorz endorses a basic income, which makes possible, to live without to work. Each humans receive a monetary basis to carry out itself. [3] [4]

Ethical aspects

The question, whether an unconditional basic income is to be aimed at at all, is also a moral. Two positions face each other - independently of the economic or political feasibility -:

Proponents derive the goal of an unconditional basic income from: The basiclegal prohibition of the hard labour is expenditure-levered by the economic obligation to the work around the self-preservation sake. The proponents would like to create thereby liberty for the personal development of the individual and to thus make new life concepts possible within social and artistic ranges. Everyone must answer for itself, which people picture it has from itself and the other one: Who can state from itself honestly that he is content with a basic income, which makes a simple life without abundance for him possible, can close on others. Too frequently the acceptance was met that „the others would put “on the putrid skin, but like many in the long run „the others “were, could only the experience teach.

Opponents fear however, an unconditional basic income citizens more frequently than at present to the Idleness will tempt, since the material incentive sinks for the admission of a work. If for humans with small income work is materially hardly worthwhile itself in particular, among other things no longer enough humans would be, in order low remunerated and particularly unpleasant work to implement.

Götz Werner, a proponent of an unconditional basic income, holds out, if there were an unconditional basic income, then became, after the laws of free markets, so far badly paid, but necessary work to be better paid and/or arranged more attractive. For necessary or desired work inevitably responding and worthwhile employer-employee relationships would be created far away, and for sufficiently attractive and/or lucrative work offers would be on the average and medium-term always enough work-willing.


Ulmer model

The unconditional basic income after the Ulmer model is disbursed in principle all citizens at height of the subsistence level which can be specified by the legislator. The citizen money is financed arise-neutrally from a citizen money delivery. This delivery is a firm percentage of the gross income, which is then distributed in an allocation procedure.

Solidary citizen money after existing building

The Thuringian Prime Minister Dieter existing building demands a solidary citizen money unconditional basic income mentioned of 800 euro gross for everyone (abzgl. 200 € for a basis health insurance). All national transfer services are to be bundled thereby. The concept with an extensive transformation (“system change”) in the tax and social politics is connected.

Unconditional basic income after Götz Werner

The initiative undertake the future of Götz Werner demands the introduction unconditional basic incomes, whose height is to be determined. At the same time all taxes on incomes are to be abolished. The financing takes place via the increase of the value added tax on 48%. After Götz Werner is the basic income the existing wages and salaries to replace. At height of the basic income an employer needs to pay no more wages and salaries, loaded with it the national budget and reduces its labour costs drastically.


In Germany would result in the case of a basic income of 800 € monthly for 80 million citizens costs of 768 billion euro per year. For the financing of these costs there are two substantial model beginnings: Taxation of the consumption and revenue taxation.

  • Taxation of the consumption: With Werner' model incomes schen are not at all paid duty, why each gross income 1:1 is paid off as net income. Werner the' sche model suggests the taxation of services and goods for the financing of the basic income. Here the control system would have to be strongly changed; high consumer taxes would result. That could tempt in larger yardstick taxes to evade (black market). However the problem of the moonlighting is gone around here, since income is not taxed by work.
  • Revenue taxation (transfer border model, for example the Ulmer model or the solidary citizen money): They could be introduced relatively simply to the existing system. However they presuppose that sufficient persons have income, which is umverteilt to the incomeless population part. Moonlighting can be promoted thereby.

The transfer border model functions similarly as the negative income taxes, whereby after the transfer border income is taxed differently (less). Income remains further „subsidized “and it the incentive is given to come over the transfer border in order to pay fewer taxes. The financing of the basic income is based on the incomes beyond the transfer border. The basic income is charged with the income and income remains paid duty. The financing is based here thus mainly on the revenue taxation.

According to the existing building model costs at a value of 583 billion euro would arise for the state annually. The today's system costs the state against it to 735 billion euro per year. Thus an unconditional basic income would be more favorable after existing building than the today's system. [5] The Konrad Adenauer donation (KAS) tested and comes the concept of existing building to the conclusion: „The concept (of existing building) is “, like that eligible for financing KAS executive committee Bernhard Vogel. [6]

Legal situation in Germany

After today's legal situation no legal requirement on a basic income exists in the Federal Republic. Humans, who are e.g. because of physical or mental physical defects unable to unfold personal or social have however a legally secured requirement on a national existenzielle minimum safety device, those as minimum warranty a soziokulturelles subsistence level to ensure must (BVerfGE 40, 121.133).

Beginnings for the introduction of an unconditional basic income

In Brazil under president Lula first steps for an unconditional basic income were converted. At present only the poorest ones receive a small amount, until 2010 is the payments since the entire population is expanded.

Dahingegen is not often in this connection discussed the example of Alaska, despite the Bedingungslosigkeit of the disbursement from the Alaska permanently find, which receives to each inhabitant there, “genuine” unconditional basic income, there the amount (2006: approx. 1,100 US-$ per person and year) by far not is existence-securing.

General criticism at the unconditional basic income

To the special Critic at the individual models see respective major item

The effects on job market and prices are foreseeable with no model, by them depend however the fitness of the model. With no model work is abolished, since goods (and services) must be also further produced. [7]

Critics refer to the fact that an unconditional basic income can be an incentive to an intensified immigration. [8]

In opinion of Gerd Habermann of the working group of independent entrepreneurs is based the BGE on a conception of a state, in which all could live at expense of all different. The psychological effects are: strong sinking of the work motivation, particularly with „the bad-earning “, as well as the propagation of a innovation-hostile pensioner mentality. The fact that the work does not go out showed full employment countries from Switzerland to New Zealand. Rather the number of the jobs increased by automation. [9]

Current discussion in Germany

  • The basic policy statement commission of the CDU discusses at present the model of Dieter existing building [10]. CDU Secretary-General Ronald Pofalla regards the model as visionär: “Fascinating is that with this form of basic safety device each form of social bureaucracy is omitted: no more forms, no means test. In addition, a citizen money can lead to it that humans, who live in the second or third generation of social transfers withdraw themselves finally from the work company. We formed in the CDU basic policy statement commission still no locking opinion over it[10]. The CDU close Konrad Adenauer donation under the presidency of Bernhard Vogel considers the concept eligible for financing [6].
  • SPD Secretary-General Hubertus welfare criticizes the CDU plans for a basic income: “That is a conservative quiet putting premium. Humans are stamped simply given up, as useless, pushed into the dead end and compensated with money[11].
  • The Greens stand up-to-date for a BGE rather rejecting opposite [12] - in such a way for example the largest regional organization from North Rhine-Westphalia on its Party Congress a BGE rejected, which terminates the past socialnational safety device completely: „The Green existence safety device […] connects […] the security of the subsistence level with the offer to support existing self-help abilities. […] In particular before this background the Greens North-Rhine/Westphalia reject all models of an unconditional basic income, the all past social support systems in their width replaced are “[13]. In addition, it exists a suggestion for a Green basic safety device [14]. The Green youth has an unconditional basic income in the program [15].
  • The FDP demands „liberals the citizen money “, which does not represent basic income, since it contains an industrial conscription [16]

Also in numerous other countries discussions take place over a basic income.

Web on the left of



  1. four models in the comparison. In: politics. 26. January 2007.
  2. Robert Anton Wilson: RICH=Rising Income through Cybernetic Homeostatis (rising income by cybernetic equilibrium). In: The Illuminati of papers. Reinbek with Hamburg 1980, ISBN 3-499-15191-X.
  5. Wikinews: Citizen money for all demands of Thuringia Prime Minister Althaus (CDU); Cordula Eubel/Albert Funk: Two camps, an idea. In:, 21 July 2006.
  6. A b Hannes cook: 800 euro for everyone? CDUler findet's well. In:, 25 October 2006: „This social reform - the largest since Bismarck - would be realistic, explains the Christian-democratic Konrad Adenauer donation (KAS). ‚The concept is eligible for financing `, said KAS executive committee Bernhard Vogel taz. “See also Cologne city indicator: „After computations of the CDUnear Konrad Adenauer donation (KAS) an unconditional basic income for all citizens is payable and not more expensive than the today's social system. “
  7. Werner Rätz: For an unconditional basic income financing models are inevitable, but harmful! New type character network basic income, No. 9, November 2006.
  8. E.G. Richard Hauser: An alternative basic safety device - social and economic aspects. In: Magazine society economics politics, Jg. 55, 2006, P. 331-348 (on-line summary).
  9. [
  10. A b see
  12. Wolfgang Strengmann Kuhn: Poverty in Germany and basic income. (Pdf), 21 December 2006.
  13. alliance 90/Die the Green North-Rhine/Westphalia: Resolutions of the national delegate conference of alliance 90/Die the Green North-Rhine/Westphalia - „for a new departure in the social politics “(pdf, 55 KB), Bochum, 16. /17. June 2007:
  15. ↑ the Green youth Federal association: the unconditional basic income
  16. . See FDP: Liberals the citizen money.
  17. see homepage the LEFT ONE. Federal Association of Labor basic income
  18. see AG enough for all,
  19. network basic income (Germany).
  20. see press release: 77. Plenary assembly German federal youth ring: Youth-political corner point paper to questions of the future discharges. Basic income for all. 3. December 2004.