NASA Confirms It's First Planet In Habitable Zone of Sun-Like Star

Source: NASA

NASA's Kepler mission has confirmed its first planet in the "habitable zone," the region where liquid water could exist on a planet’s surface. Kepler also has discovered more than 1,000 new planet candidates, nearly doubling its previously known count. Ten of these candidates are near-Earth-size and orbit in the habitable zone of their host star. Candidates require follow-up observations to verify they are actual planets.

The newly confirmed planet, Kepler-22b, is the smallest yet found to orbit in the middle of the habitable zone of a star similar to our sun. The planet is about 2.4 times the radius of Earth. Scientists don't yet know if Kepler-22b has a predominantly rocky, gaseous or liquid composition, but its discovery is a step closer to finding Earth-like planets.

Previous research hinted at the existence of near-Earth-size planets in habitable zones, but clear confirmation proved elusive. Two other small planets orbiting stars smaller and cooler than our sun recently were confirmed on the very edges of the habitable zone, with orbits more closely resembling those of Venus and Mars.

"This is a major milestone on the road to finding Earth's twin," said Douglas Hudgins, Kepler program scientist at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "Kepler's results continue to demonstrate the importance of NASA's science missions, which aim to answer some of the biggest questions about our place in the universe."

The Week in Alternative News 20

Source: SetYouFreeNews and  Activist Post

Documentation and Links:

Why Ron Paul Makes a Compelling Case

Source: The Nation
John Nichols

Ron Paul is far from perfect. But the Texas congressman and maverick GOP presidential contender brings to the 2012 race a record far more worthy of commendation than those of his competitors for the Republican nomination.

Paul voted against the Patriot Act.

Paul voted against launching the Iraq War.

Paul has consistently supported moves to bring the troops home from Iraq, from Afghanistan and from just about everywhere else they are garrisoned.

Paul has worked with Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank on a campaign to cut the Pentagon budget by $1 trillion.

Paul has worked with Frank to decriminalize marijuana and to dial back the worst excesses of the drug war.

Paul has consistently opposed free-trade deals that have led to massive layoffs and factory closings in the United States.

Paul has worked with Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and Florida Congressman Alan Grayson to crack down on the Federal Reserve’s secrecy and abuses.

Yes, yes, of course Paul’s anti-government rhetoric goes to extremes, and, yes, yes, of course he is an inconsistent libertarian on some vital issues.

But Ron Paul really has taken a lot of commendable stands in recent years.

And now, he has done something truly worthy of admiration.

He has chosen not to be ridiculous.

Confronted with the prospect of a participating in a debate hosted by the second-most-absurd figure in American public life, Donald Trump, Paul simply said “no.”

The campaign of the candidate who, in the new Des Moines Register survey is running second in the field of GOP presidential contenders with less than a month to go before Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses, issued a delightfully snarky statement:

The Illuminati Depopulation Agenda

Source: The Intel Hub
Dean Henderson

(Excerpted from Chapter 13: USS Persian Gulf: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf…)

While the global elite construct underground bunkers, eat organic and hoard seeds in Arctic vaults; the global poor are being slowly starved thanks to high commodity prices and poisoned with genetically modified (GMO) food. Austerity measures aimed largely at the poor are being imposed on all the nations of the world. Weather events grow more deadly and brushfire wars more frequent. An AK-47 can be obtained for $49 in the markets of West Africa. The depopulation campaign of the inbred Illuminati bankers is accelerating.

In 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower, who later warned of a “military-industrial complex”, commissioned a panel of scientists to study the issue of overpopulation.  The scientists put forth Alternatives I, II and III, advocating both the release of deadly viruses and perpetual warfare as means to decrease world population.

The first supposition dovetailed nicely with the pharmaceutical interests of the Rockefellers.  According to Nexus magazine, the Rockefellers own one-half of the US pharmaceutical industry, which would reap billions developing medicines to “battle” the deadly viruses about to be released.

In 1969 the Senate Church Committee discovered that the US Defense Department (DOD) had requested a budget of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars for a program to speed development of new viruses which target and destroy the human immune system.  DOD officials testified before Congress that they planned to produce, “a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could be acquired…Most important is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.”  House Bill 5090 authorized the funds and MK-NAOMI was carried out at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

Out of this research came the AIDS virus which was targeted at “undesirable elements” of the population. The first AIDS viruses were administered through a massive smallpox vaccine campaign in central and southern Africa by the World Health Organization in 1977.  A year later ads appeared in major US newspapers soliciting “promiscuous gay male volunteers” to take part in a Hepatitis B vaccine study. [1]

The program targeted male homosexuals age 20-40 in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, St. Louis and San Francisco. It was administered by the US Centers for Disease Control which, under its earlier incarnation as the US Public Health Department in Atlanta, oversaw the Tuskegee syphilis experiments on African American males. [2]

US Meddling in Russia: In Their Own Words

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

Before reading the following "interests" the United States government with US tax money, is pursing within the sovereign Russian Federation, it may be instructive to know just who constitutes the National Endowment for Democracy, the umbrella organization that funds a literal army of global sedition. (NED's funding for Russian NGOs is listed last).

Video: Not everyone pretends US meddling in Russia is in the best interest of Russia, the US or the world. 

For a full description of NEDs Board of Directors, their affiliations and guiding ideologies of which they've articulated in signed documents available freely on the Internet from their official think-tank websites, please read: NED & Freedom House are run by Warmongering Imperialists.

One may also ask, just how Americans would feel, if a similar effort was made to interfere in US politics, where leaders were "identified" and "supported" by foreign nations seeking to establish what they considered acceptable political institutions to govern the US as they saw fit.

National Democratic Institute

NDI has been working to support and strengthen democratic institutions in the Russian Federation since the early 1990s by stimulating greater citizen participation in decision-making processes and strengthening civic organizations and political parties through international exchanges of experience. 

Is The War on Terror a Complete Hoax? Paul Craig Roberts Reveals How Social Engineers Infected America with Mass Paranoia

Source: Natural News
Mike Adams

What if there weren’t any real terrorists threatening America and the whole thing was just made up to justify a military agenda? A rational person might say that if we’re all going to give up our rights, and our Fourth Amendment, and have U.S. troops in the streets running checkpoints, then logically there should at least be some evidence that America has been infiltrated with terrorists, right? Or, more specifically, evidence from a reliable source that has not already been caught lying about terrorism, which would exclude the federal government, of course.

Look around you today: Do you see any terrorists? Any “towel heads” aiming guns at your family? Anybody walking around with a vest full of explosives? Nope.

Have you ever seen the TSA catch a terrorist at the airport? Ever read a news report of the TSA catching a terrorist? Ever heard of an Air Marshall stopping a terrorist in-flight? Nope.

Have you ever heard of the FBI halting a terrorist plot that they didn’t fabricate, plan and carry out themselves? (All the terror plots “stopped” by the FBI are, on the record, planned and carried out by the FBI itself.) (http://www.naturalnews.com/033751_F…)

Seriously. Clear the cobwebs out of your head for a moment and think logically: Where are all these “terrorists” that we’re supposed to be afraid of and give up our rights for? Where are they?

Now, of course, the government can and will, from time to time, stage some sort of terrorist event to remind everyone to be afraid. That’s a given. In classic Orwellian protocol, any war that grants a government unlimited power will be indefinitely sustained.

This is why the “War on Terror” was declared against a tactic, not a nation or a person. That way, the so-called “war” can be carried out indefinitely. A war with no end. Perpetual tyranny. At first, if you remember, we were told we needed TSA agents at the airports because of Osama Bin Laden, remember? He was the “mastermind” who was going to cause airplanes to fall out of the sky. So what happened after he was killed and removed from the picture? The U.S. government announced the terror threat was now “even higher” because Bin Laden’s loyal supporters would now seek revenge!

Do you see how, under this brand of sick logic, the war on terror will go on indefinitely? They can always claim someone else is dangerous… there’s always a new boogeyman when it serves the interests of the state. That’s why it’s now obvious that this war has been entirely fabricated to achieve specific political and social agendas.

The War on Terror is a Hoax

The best article yet written on this subject was penned by none other than Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal.

NBC / Marist Poll: Ron Paul Best Chance To Beat Obama

Source: Ron Paul 2012

Among all competitors for the Republican nomination, 2012 Presidential candidate Ron Paul has the best chance of defeating President Obama in a head-to-head race, according to a new poll.

The NBC News/Marist Poll has Ron Paul polling in the top three among likely Republican caucus goers. Paul places third with 17 percent behind Mitt Romney in second place and Newt Gingrich in first place with 18 and 26 percent, respectively. Among the larger pool of potential Republican caucus goers, Paul again places third with 16 percent, behind Romney and Gingrich with 18 and 25 percent, respectively.

Paul polling in the top three in Iowa is a conventional outcome, yet the NBC News/Marist Poll reveals some interesting facts about the 12-term Texas Congressman’s competitiveness against Obama:

President Obama defeats all GOP competitors except for Ron Paul in a hypothetical matchup; and

42 percent of registered voters in Iowa support Ron Paul and 42 percent back Obama, with 16 percent undecided; and

Ron Paul leads Obama 42 to 35 percent among independent voters and attracts 15 percent of Iowa’s Democrats; and

Ron Paul also leads Obama by 14 percentage points among voters under 45 years of age.

Protesters March Against Bill That Could Designate Them Terrorists

Source: Prison Planet
Paul Joseph Watson

Occupy Portland protesters marched yesterday against a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act that could lead them to be designated as terrorists and carted off to a foreign detention camp.

“Protesters took issue with the $662 billion defense spending bill, singling out language in the U.S. Senate version that says U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism can be detained indefinitely,” reports The Oregonian.

As we highlighted last week, Section 1031 of the NDAA bill, which will become law if approved by President Obama, declares the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allows American citizens to be arrested on U.S. soil and incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay.

Given the fact that the Department of Defense now defines exercising the First Amendment as “low-level terrorism,” demonstrators have every right to be concerned about being targeted by Section 1031 of the NDAA bill.

As we reported back in 2009, the DoD’s Anti-terrorism and Force Protection Annual Refresher Training Course advises its personnel that political protest amounts to “low-level terrorism”.

The training introduction reads:

“Anti-terrorism (AT) and Force Protection (FP) are two facets of the Department of Defense (DoD) Mission Assurance Program. It is DoD policy, as found in DoD I 2000.16, that the DoD Components and the DoD elements and personnel shall be protected from terrorist acts through a high priority, comprehensive, AT program. The DoD’s AT program shall be all encompassing using an integrated systems approach.”

Analysts Say Russia Could Deliver Deathblow to NATO

Source: International

With the Russian threat to cut land routes for supply to Nato troops in Afghanistan, the Afghan battleground may turn into a cold deathtrap for Nato, defence analysts believe. They say that Pakistan should utilise the opportunity for a peaceful and prosperous Pakistan by pulling it out of the American war.

Russia has threatened to cut off Nato supply routes to Afghanistan if the alliance doesn’t compromise on its missile defence plans. “If Nato doesn’t give a serious response, we have to address matters in relations in other areas,” Russian news services reported. Russia’s cooperation on Afghanistan may be an area for review, the news services reported.

Pakistan has already cut the Nato supply route after the Mohmand Agency attack by Nato troops that killed twenty-six Pakistani soldiers.

Lieutenant General (r) Hameed Gul while talking to The News said that Russia would utilise every option to take revenge from the Americans and time has come for the Russians to do this. He said that Russia wants to join hands with Pakistan and Pakistan should reconsider its policy towards Russia. “Americans and Nato troops have been strangled in Afghanistan and time has come for Pakistan to avail the opportunity that it missed on 9/11 to regain the respect and sovereignty”, Gul said.

He mentioned that Americans will have to leave Afghanistan and will ask for concessions and Pakistan should negotiate with them for their exit. If Russia cuts the supply then the route will be from Georgia to Baku and then to Azerbaijan, which means NATO will never get the supply, said Gul. “Now Nato troops will have to exit Vietnam style, and that too by using Pakistan’s airspace because Iran will never let USA use its airspace”, the retired general said. He mentioned that the war against terror that was started with our own people will come to an end at once and there will be peace in no time once the Americans leave Afghanistan. He said that Indian interests in Afghanistan were growing but India will get nothing from Afghanistan.

Donald Trump Dismisses Ron Paul as "Joke Candidate"

Source: Infowars
Kurt Nimmo

The Donald is miffed Ron Paul has decided not attend his soirée. In response to a question about Paul’s decision to not attend – along with John Huntsman – the Newsmax GOP “debate” hosted by Trump, he said it doesn’t matter if “joke candidates” do not participate. “I think those two candidates have zero chance of being elected so it makes no difference.”

Joke candidate with zero chance? Mr. Trump should adjust his meds.

 

Over the weekend, Paul pulled ahead of Mitt Romney to secure second place in the latest Des Moines Register of likely Republican caucus participants in Iowa with 18 percent of the votes. The globalist darling that has received the lion’s share of corporate media coverage of late, New Gingrich, came in first with 25 percent while the pizza magnate and former director of the Kansas City Federal Reserve, Herman Cain, packed his bags and headed for the political wilderness. He tied with the Borg hive Tea Party favorite, Michele Bachman, at eight percent.

Trump told NBC’s Matt Lauer “Ron Paul as an example says Iran should have nuclear weapons or can have nuclear weapons and doesn’t even think in terms of Israel.”

During the CBS “debate” Ron Paul was asked about Israel and the impending attack on Iran for its supposed nuclear weapons program. He said Israel can take care of itself.

Paul has said U.S. “foreign military aid to Israel is actually more like corporate welfare to the U.S. military industrial complex, as Israel is forced to purchase only U.S. products with the assistance. We send almost twice as much aid to other countries in the Middle East, which only insures increased militarization and the drive toward war.”

Ron Paul has consistently opposed foreign aid – not just to Israel, but all foreign countries. “No foreign aid should exist. Foreign aid is taking money from poor people in rich countries and giving it to rich people in poor countries,” he said during the CBS establishment media event last month.

The Economist tried to shoot Paul down on this argument following the “debate,” but failed miserably. It didn’t bother to mention that foreign aid is immoral and unconstitutional.

“Taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars each year to protect the borders of other countries, while Washington refuses to deal with our own border security needs,” Paul writes. “Congress has been rendered virtually irrelevant in foreign policy decisions and regularly cedes authority to an executive branch that refuses to be held accountable for its actions.”

Corbett Report Episode 211 - Expertology

Source: Corbett Report
James Corbett 

The experts always know best…or do they? Join us today on The Corbett Report podcast as we scrutinize the media’s ready reliance on “experts” to say what the establishment wants to be said, and what this practice means for the rise of the scientific dictatorship.

Documentation:

World War III: The Launching of a Preemptive Nuclear War against Iran

Source: Global Research
Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

The launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran has been on the active drawing board of the Pentagon since 2005.  

If such a war were to be launched, the entire Middle East Central Asia region would flare up.  Humanity would be precipitated into a World War III Scenario. 

World War III is not front-page news. The mainstream media has excluded in-depth analysis and debate on the implications of these war plans. 

The onslaught of World War III, were it to be carried out, would be casually described as a "no-fly zone", an operation under NATO's Responsibility to Protect (R2P) with minimal "collateral damage" or a "limited" punitive bombing against specific military targets, all of which purport to support democracy and human rights in the targeted country.  

Public opinion is largely unaware of the grave implications of these war plans, which contemplate the use of nuclear weapons, ironically in retaliation to Iran's nonexistent nuclear weapons program. 

Moreover, 21st Century military technology is at an advanced stage of development combining an array of sophisticated weapons systems.   

We are at the crossroads of the most serious crisis in World history. 

The future of humanity is at stake.  

The present situation is one of advanced war planning by a formidable military force using nuclear warheads. 

The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest.

The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the World simultaneously.

Militarization at the global level is instrumented through the US military's Unified Command structure: the entire planet is divided up into geographic Combatant Commands under the control of the Pentagon. According to (former) NATO Commander General Wesley Clark, the Pentagon’s military road-map consists of a sequence of war theaters: “[The] five-year campaign plan [includes]... a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.” 

Military action is waged in the name of the "Global War on Terrorism" and Global Security. It has a stated "humanitarian" "pro-democracy" mandate. 

It is predicated on the notion that the West's arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons are (in contrast to those [nonexistent] of the Islamic Republic), according to expert scientific opinion on contract to the Pentagon "harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground."

Irresponsible politicians are unaware of the implications of their actions. They believe their own war propaganda: nuclear weapons are heralded as an instrument of peace and democracy. 

War is heralded as a peace-keeping making operation carried out with the support of the "international community". 

The victims of war are described as the perpetrators. Iran and Syria constitute a threat to Global Security thereby justifying pre-emptive military action.

Global Warfare
The concept of the "Long War" has characterised US military doctrine since the end of World War II.