THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION

05/28/2012

http://nswbc.org/Op%20Ed/Op-ed-Part1-Nov15-06.htm

Part 1: The Foreign Agent Factor

By Sibel Edmonds

Sibel Edmonds is the founder and director of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC). Ms. Edmonds worked as a language specialist for the FBI.  During her work with the bureau, she discovered and reported serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence that had national security implications. After she reported these acts to FBI management, she was retaliated against by the FBI and ultimately fired in March 2002. Since that time, court proceedings on her case have been blocked by the assertion of “State Secret Privilege”; the Congress of the United States has been gagged and prevented from any discussion of her case through retroactive re-classification by the Department of Justice. Ms. Edmonds is fluent in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani; and has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, and a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University. PEN American Center awarded Ms. Edmonds the 2006 PEN/Newman’s Own First Amendment Award.

© Copyright 2006, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.  Information in this release may be freely distributed and published provided that all such distributions make appropriate attribution to the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.

THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION

 

In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington warned that America must be constantly awake against “the insidious wiles of foreign influence…since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”

Today, foreign influence, that most baneful foe of our republican government, has its tentacles entrenched in almost all major decision making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government machine. It does so not secretly, since its self-serving activities are advocated and legitimized by highly positioned parties that reap the benefits that come in the form of financial gain and positions of power.

Foreign governments and foreign-owned private interests have long sought to influence U.S. public policy. Several have accomplished this goal; those who are able and willing to pay what it takes. Those who buy themselves a few strategic middlemen, commonly known as pimps, while in DC circles referred to as foreign registered agents and lobbyists, who facilitate and bring about desired transactions. These successful foreign entities have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying influence in Washington DC. They have the required recipe down pat: get yourself a few ‘Dime a Dozen Generals,’ bid high in the ‘former statesmen lobby auction’, and put in your pocket one or two ‘ex-congressmen turned lobbyists’ who know the ropes when it comes to pocketing a few dozen who still serve.

The most important facet of this influence to consider is what happens when the active and powerful foreign entities’ objectives are in direct conflict with our nation’s objectives and its interests and security; and when this is the case, who pays the ultimate price and how. There is no need for assumptions of hypothetical situations to answer these questions, since throughout recent history we have repeatedly faced the dire consequences of the highjacking of our foreign and domestic policies by these so-called foreign agents of foreign influence.

Let’s illustrate this with the most important recent case, the catastrophe endured by our people; the September Eleven terrorist attacks. Let’s observe how certain foreign interests, combined with their U.S. agents and benefactors, overrode the interests and security of the entire nation; how thousands of victims and their loved ones were kicked aside to serve the interests of a few; foreign influence and its agents.

 

Senator Graham’s Revelation

It has been established that two of the 9/11 hijackers had a support network in the U.S. that included agents of the Saudi government, and that the Bush administration and the FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship.

In his book, “Intelligence Matters,” Senator Bob Graham made clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry’s final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties in the House and Senate intelligence committees.

Here is an excerpt from Senator Graham’s statement from the July 24, 2003 congressional record on the classified 27 pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11: “The most serious omission, in my view, is part 4 of the report, which is entitled Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive National Security Matters. Those 27 pages have almost been entirely censured [sic]….The declassified version of this finding tells the American people that our investigation developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. In other words, officials of a foreign government are alleged to have aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on our country on September 11, which took over 3,000 lives.”

In his book Graham reveals, “Our investigators found a CIA memo dated August 2, 2002, whose author concluded that there is incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists within the Saudi government. On September 11, America was not attacked by a nation-state, but we had just discovered that the attackers were actively supported by one, and that state was our supposed friend and ally Saudi Arabia.” He then cites another case, “We had discovered an FBI asset who had a close relationship with two of the terrorists; a terrorist support network that went through the Saudi Embassy; and a funding network that went through the Saudi Royal family.”

The most explosive revelation in Graham’s book is the following statement with regard to the administration’s attitude on page 216: “It was as if the President’s loyalty lay more with Saudi Arabia than with America’s safety.” Further, he states that he asked the FBI to undertake a review of the Riggs Bank records on the terrorists’ money trail, to look at other Saudi companies with ties to al-Qaeda, to plan for monitoring suspect Saudi interests in the United States; however, Graham adds: “To my knowledge, none of these investigations have been completed…Nor do we know anything else about what I believe to be a state-sponsored terrorist support network that still exists, largely undamaged, within the United States.”

What Graham is trying to establish in his book and previous public statements in this regard, and doing so under state imposed ‘secrecy and classification’, is that the classification and cover up of those 27 pages is not about protecting ‘U.S. national security, methods of intelligence collection, or ongoing investigations,’ but to protect certain U.S. allies. Meaning, our government put the interests of certain foreign nations and their U.S. beneficiaries far above its own people and their interests. While Saudi Arabia has been specifically pointed to by Graham, other countries involved have yet to be identified.

In covering up Saudi Arabia’s direct role in supporting Al Qaeda, the 9/11 Commission goes even a few steps further than the congress and the Executive Branch. The report claims “there is no convincing evidence that any government financially supported al-Qaeda before 9/11.” Their report ignores all the information provided by government officials to Congress, as well as volumes of published reports and investigations by other nations, regarding Muslim and Arab regimes that have supported al Qaeda. It completely disregards the terrorist lists of the Treasury and State Departments, which have catalogued the Saudi government’s decades of support for Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

Why in the world would the United States government go so far to protect Saudi Arabia in the face of what itself declares to be the biggest security threat facing our nation and the world today?

Why is the United States willing to set aside its own security and interests in order to advance the interests of another state?

How can a government that’s been intent upon using the terrorist attacks to carry out many unjustifiable atrocities, prevent bringing to justice those who’ve been established as being directly responsible for it?

More importantly, how is this done in a nation that prides itself as one that operates under governance of the people, by the people, for the people?

How did our government bodies, those involved in drafting and implementing our nation’s policies, evolve into this foreign influence-peddling operation?

In order to answer these questions one must first establish who stands to lose and who stands to gain by protecting Saudi Arabia from being exposed and facing consequences of its involvement in terrorist networks activities. In addition to identifying the nations in question, we must identify the interests as well as the actors; their agents. Let’s look at Saudi Arabia as one of the successful foreign nations that have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying and peddling influence in Washington DC, and identify its hired ‘agents’ and ‘agents by default.’

Foreign Agents by Default

Although when it comes to our complex diplomatic threading with Saudi Arabia the easiest answer appears to be the ‘oil factor,’ upon further inspection the Saudi’s influence and role extends into other areas, such as the Military Industrial Complex and the too familiar Lobbying Games.

 

According to the report published by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), Saudi Arabia is America’s top customer. Since 1990 the U.S. government, through the Pentagon’s arms export program, has arranged for the delivery of more than $39.6 billion in  foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia, and an additional $394 million worth of arms were delivered to the Saudi regime through the State Department’s direct commercial sales program. Oil rich Saudi Arabia is a cash-paying customer; a compulsive buyer of our weaponry. The list of U.S. sellers includes almost all the major players such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.

The report by FAS establishes that despite the show of U.S. support demonstrated by this astounding quantity of arms sales, Saudi Arabia’s human rights record is extremely poor; see the U.S. State Department’s 2000 Human Rights Report. Saudi Arabia’s position as a strategic Gulf ally has blinded U.S. officials into approving a level and quality of arms exports that should never have been allowed to a non-democratic country with such a poor human rights record.

Further, there are indications of Saudi’s active role as a player in the nuclear black-market. According to Mohammed Khilewi, first secretary at the Saudi mission to the United Nations until July 1994, the Saudis have sought a bomb since 1975; they sought to buy nuclear reactors from China, supported Pakistan’s nuclear program, and contributed $5 billion to Iraq’s nuclear weapons program between 1985 and 1990. While the U.S. government vocally opposes the development or procurement of ballistic missiles by non-allies, it has been very quiet in Saudi Arabia’s case, considering the fact that it possesses the longest-range ballistic missiles of any developing country.

The Military Industrial Complex certainly seems to be a winner in having the congressional report pertaining to the Saudi government’s role in supporting the 9/11 terrorist activities being classified. The exposure would have meant grounds for U.S. sanctions and retributions; it would have risked the loss of billions of dollars in revenue from its ‘top customer.’ These companies don’t even have to officially register as foreign agents; after all, their strong loyalty and unbreakable bond with foreign elements exists by default; it is called mutual benefit. They are ‘Foreign Agents by Default.’

This holds true for other parties and players involved within the MIC network; the contractors and the investors. Let’s look at one of these famous and influential players; another foreign agent even if only by default; a man who defended the Saudis against a lawsuit brought by the 9/11 victims’ family members; a man who happens to be the senior counsel for the Carlyle Group, which invests heavily in defense companies and is the nation’s 10th largest defense contractor with ties to the Saudi Royal Family, Enron, Global Crossing, among others; James Baker; Papa Bush’s Secretary of State. On the morning of September 11th, 2001, Baker was reportedly at a Carlyle investor conference with members of the Bin Laden family in the Ritz Carlton in Washington DC, while Bush Sr. was on the payroll of the Carlyle group.

The Carlyle Group, a Washington, DC based private equity firm that employs numerous former high-ranking government officials with ties to both political parties, was the ninth largest Pentagon contractor between 1998 and 2003, an ongoing Center for Public Integrity investigation into Department of Defense contracts found. According to this report, overall, six private investment firms, including Carlyle, received nearly $14 billion in Pentagon deals between 1998 and 2003. Considering the fact that Saudi Arabia is the top buyer of the U.S. weapons industry, Carlyle’s investment and its stake, and of course Jimmy Baker’s far reaching influence within the Pentagon and congress, everything seems to come together and fit perfectly to shield this foreign interest no matter the price to be paid by the American public.

The political action committees (PACs) of the biggest defense companies have given $14.2 million directly to federal candidates since Clinton’s first presidential bid, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). In 1997 alone the defense industry spent $49.5 million to lobby the nation’s decision-makers.

Between 1998 and 2004, for the six-year period, Boeing Company spent more than $57 million in lobbying. For the same period of time, Lockheed Martin poured over $55 million into lobbying activities. Northrop Grumman exceeded both by investing $83 million in lobbying, and based on a report issued by POGO, it contributed over $4 million to individuals and PACs.

With ‘dime a dozen’ generals on their boards of directors, numerous high-powered ex congressmen and senators at their disposal in the ‘K Street Lobby Quarter,’ tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations, and billions of dollars at stake, the Military Industrial Complex surely had all the incentives to act just as foreign agents would, and fight for their highly valued client; the Saudi Government. They appear to have had all the reasons to ensure that the report would not see the light of the day; no matter what the effect on the country, its security, and its interests.

K Street Lobby Quarter

The fact that Saudi Arabia pours large sums into lobbying firms and public relations companies with close ties to congress does not come as a big surprise. The FARA database under the DOJ website lists Qorvis Communications as one of Saudi Arabia’s registered foreign agents. In 2003, for only a six months period, Qorvis received more than $11 million from the Saudi government. Another firm, Loeffler Tuggey Pauerstein Rosenthal LLP, another registered foreign agent, received more than $840,000 for the same six-month period, and the list goes on. Just for this six month period the government of Saudi Arabia paid a total of more than $14 million to 13 lobbying and public relations companies; all registered as foreign agents.

Why do the Saudis spend nearly $20 million per year in lobbying activities in the U.S. via their hired agents? What kind of return on investment are they getting out of the United States Congress?

Let’s take Loeffler’s group and examine its value for the Saudi government, since it was paid over $3 million in three years between 2003 and 2005. The firm was founded by former Republican Congressman Tom Loeffler of Texas. Loeffler served in the Republican Leadership as Deputy Whip, and as Chief Deputy Whip during his third and fourth term.  He was a member of the powerful Appropriations Committee, Energy and Commerce Committee and Budget Committee. In the two Bush campaigns for governor, Loeffler, who contributed $141,000, was the largest donor. In 1998, he served as national co-chair of the Republican National Committee’s “Team 100” program for donors of $100,000 or more, and afterwards held the same title during George W. Bush’s presidential campaign. Loeffler’s generosity extends to the members of congress as well. In 6 years, he has given more than$185,000 to members of congress, 97% of it going to only Republican members. During the same six-year period, Loeffler’s firm received more than $18 million in lobbying fees.

The firm’s managing director happens to be William L. Ball. Ball served as Chief of Staff to Senators John Tower (R-TX) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA).  In 1985, he joined the Reagan Administration as Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs. Later he was assigned to the White House to serve President Reagan as his chief liaison to the Congress. Wallace Henderson is also a Partner; he was Chief Counsel and Chief of Staff to Representative W. J. Tauzin (R-LA), Chief of Staff to U.S. Senator John Breaux (D-LA).

By having foreign agents such as the Loeffler Group, in addition to their foreign agents by default, the MIC, the Saudis seem to have all their bases covered. Former secretaries and deputy secretaries with open access to the current ones, former congressmen and senators who used to be positioned on strategically valuable committees and know the rules of the congressional game, and millions of dollars available to be spent and channeled and re-channeled to various PACs go a long way toward ensuring results. Money counts. Money is needed to bring in votes. Professional skills and discretion are required to get this money to various final destinations. The registered foreign agents, the lobby groups, are geared for this task. The client is happy in the end; so are the foreign agents and the congressional actors.

Other Savvy Nations

Of course, the sanction and legitimization of far reaching foreign influence and strongholds in the U.S., despite the many dire consequences endured by its citizens, is not limited to the government of Saudi Arabia. Numerous well-documented cases can be cited for others such as Turkey, Pakistan, and Israel, to name a few.

I won’t get into the details and history of my own case, where the government invoked the state secrets privilege to gag my case and the congress in order to ‘protect certain sensitive diplomatic relations.’ The country, the foreign influence, in this case was the Republic of Turkey. The U.S. government did so despite the far reaching consequences of burying the facts involved, and disregarded the interests and security of the nation; all to protect a quasi ally engaged in numerous illegitimate activities within the global terrorist networks, nuclear black-market and narcotics activities; an ally who happens to be another compulsive and loyal buyer of the Military Industrial Complex; an ally who happens to be another savvy player in recruiting top U.S. players as its foreign agents and spending million of dollars per year to the lobbying groups headed by many ‘formers.’ Turkey’s agent list includes generals such as Joseph Ralston and Brent Scowcroft, former statesmen such as William Cohen and Marc Grossman, and of course famous ex-congressmen such as Bob Livingston and Stephen Solarz. Turkey too seems to have all its bases covered.

Another well-known and documented case involves Pakistan. Over two decades ago Richard Barlow, an intelligence analyst working for then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney issued a startling report. After reviewing classified information from field agents, he had determined that Pakistan, despite official denials, had built a nuclear bomb. In the March 29, 1993 issue of New Yorker, Seymour Hersh noted that, “even as Barlow began his digging, some senior State Department officials were worried that too much investigation would create what Barlow called embarrassment for Pakistan. Barlow’s conclusion was politically inconvenient. A finding that Pakistan possessed a nuclear bomb would have triggered a congressionally mandated cutoff of aid to the country, and it would have killed a $1.4-billion sale of F-16 fighter jets to Islamabad. A few months later a Pentagon official downplayed Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities in his testimony to Congress. When Barlow protested to his superiors, he was fired. A few years later, the Executive Branch would slap Barlow with the State Secrets Privilege.

As we all now know, Pakistan provided direct nuclear assistance to Iran and Libya.  During the Cold War, the U.S. put up with Pakistani lies and deception about their nuclear activities, it did not enforce its restrictions on Pakistan’s nuclear program when it counted, and as a result Pakistan ended up with a U.S.-made nuclear weapons system. Yet again, after 9/11, the Bush administration issued a waiver ending the implementation of almost all sanctions on Pakistan because of the perceived need for Pakistani assistance in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, who ironically were brought to power by direct U.S. support in the 1980s in the first place.

Weiss, in the May-June 2004 issue of the Bulletin states: “We are essentially back where we were with Pakistan in the 1980s. It is apparent that it has engaged in dangerous nuclear mischief with North Korea, Iran, and Libya (and perhaps others), but thus far without consequences to its relationship with the United States because of other, overriding foreign policy considerations–not the Cold War this time, but the war on terrorism.” He continues: “But now there is a major political difference. It was one thing for Pakistan, a country with which the United States has had good relations generally, to follow India and produce the bomb for itself. It is quite another for Pakistan to help two-thirds of the “axis of evil” to get the bomb as well.”

 

FARA & LDA

An agent of a ‘foreign principal’ is defined as any individual or organization which acts at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal, or whose activities are directed by a foreign principal who engages in political activities, or acts in a public relations capacity for a foreign principal, or solicits or dispenses any thing of value within the United States for a foreign principal, or represents the interests of a foreign principal before any agency or official of the U.S. government.

In 1938, in response to the large number of German propaganda agents in the pre-WWII U.S., Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was established to insure that the American public and its lawmakers know the source of propaganda intended to sway public opinion, policy, and laws. The Act requires every agent of a foreign principal to register with the Department of Justice and file forms outlining its agreements with, income from, and expenditures on behalf of the foreign principal. Any agent testifying before a committee of Congress must furnish the committee with a copy of his most recent registration statement. The agent must keep records of all his activities and permit the Attorney General to inspect them. However, as is the case with many laws, the Act is filled with exemptions and loopholes that allow minimization of, and in some cases complete escape from, warranted scrutiny.

There are a number of exemptions. For example, persons whose activities are of a purely commercial nature or of a religious, academic, and charitable nature are exempt. Any agent who is engaged in lobbying activities and is registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) is exempt. The LDA of 1995 was passed after decades of effort to make the regulation and disclosure of lobbying the federal government more effective. However, LDA also has serious and important loopholes and limitations that can be summed up as:Inadequate Disclosure, Inadequate Enforcement, and Inadequate Regulation of Conduct. The recent congressional scandals make this point very clear.

In addition, neither act deals with an important issue: Conflict of Interest. Many of these agents, with their loyalty to the foreign hand that feeds them, end up being appointed to various positions, commissions and special envoys by our government. Recall Kissinger and his appointment to head the 9/11 Commission, and of course the recent revelation by Woodward on his advisory position to the current White House. Take a look at Jimmy Baker’s current appointment on the Iraq commission. Same goes for the father of all the ‘dime a dozen generals’, Brent Scowcroft, and one of his new protégés, General Joseph Ralston. In short, neither FARA nor LDA creates meaningful oversight, control, or enforcement; neither deals with conflict of interest issues, and neither provides any deterrence or consequences for unethical or illegal conduct.

It used to be congressional ‘pork projects’ and ‘corporate influence’ that raised eyebrows now and then; here and there. Gone are those days. Today the unrestricted and uncontrollable money game and influence peddling tricks within the major decision-making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government have reached new heights; yet, no raised eyebrows are registered. Sadly, today, a new version of ‘The Manchurian Candidate’ would have to be produced as a documentary.

The other day I received a request to sign on to a petition put forth by a group of 9/11 family members urging the congress to reopen the investigations of 9/11 and declassify the infamous 27-pages which deal with foreign governments, U.S. allies, that provided support for those who carried out the attacks on our nation. My heart goes out to them. I do sympathize with them. I am known to take on similar propositions and methods of activism myself. However, looking at the realities, seeing what it takes to get things done in Washington, realizing how this beast works in the Real Sin City, I would encourage them to look at the root cause, rather than the symptoms. There are only two ways I can see that can bring about what they have been fighting for and what the majority of us desire to see in terms of bringing about Truth, Oversight, and Accountability; Justice.

The family members, and their supporters, us, either have to tackle the major cause; the corruption of our government officials via unrestricted and undisciplined ‘revolving doors’ and ‘foreign influence & lobby’ practices, and push for expedient meaningful reforms by the new ambitious congress, and have them prove to us their worth. Or, they may as well give up their long-held integrity, go bid high for one or two former statesmen, hire a few dime a dozen generals, and buy themselves a couple of ex-congressmen turned lobbyists; that will do the job.

The Highjacking of a Nation

 

Part 2:

 

http://nswbc.org/Op%20Ed/Part2-FNL-Nov29-06.htm

 

The Auctioning of Former Statesmen & Dime a Dozen Generals

By Sibel Edmonds

“The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes.”– – Justice Felix Frankfurter

It used to be the three branches – congress, the executive, and the courts – that we considered the make-up of our nation’s federal government. And some would point to the press as a possible fourth branch, due to the virtue of its influence in shaping our policies. Today, more and more people have come to view corporate and foreign lobby firms, with their preponderant clout and enormous power, as the official fourth branch of our nation’s government. Not only do I agree with them, I would even take it a step further and give it a higher status it certainly deserves.

Operating invisibly under the radar of media and public scrutiny, lobby groups and foreign agents have become the ‘epicenter’ of our government, where former statesmen and ‘dime a dozen generals’ cash in on their connections and peddle their enormous influence to the highest bidders turned clients. These groups’ activities shape our nation’s policies and determine the direction of the flow of its taxpayer driven wealth, while to them the interests of the majority are considered irrelevant, and the security of the nation is perceived as inconsequential.

In Part1 of this series I used Saudi influence via its lobby and foreign agents by default as a case to illustrate how certain foreign interests, combined with their U.S. agents and benefactors, override the interests and security of the entire nation. This illustrative model case involved three major elements: the purchasing of a few ‘dime a dozen generals,’ bidding high in the auctioning of ‘former statesmen,’ and buying one or two ex-congressmen turned lobbyists. In addition, the piece emphasized the importance of the “Military Industrial Complex (MIC),” which became a de facto ‘foreign agent’ by the universally recognized principle of ‘mutual benefit.’

This article will attempt to illustrate the functioning of the above model in the case of another country, the Republic of Turkey, and its set of agents and operators in the U.S. In doing so, I want to emphasize the importance of separating the populace of example nations – Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, Pakistan… – from their regimes and select key participating actors. As is the case with our nation, they too suffer the consequences of their regime’s self-serving policies and conduct. Not only that, they also have to endure what they consider ‘U.S. imposed policies’ that further the interests of only a few. Think of it this way, the majority of us in the States do not see the infamous and powerful neocon cabal as the chosen and accepted representatives of our nation’s values and objectives. We do not want to be perceived and judged based on the actions of a few at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo. The same is valid for these nations’ citizenry; so let not their corrupt and criminal regimes be the basis of our judgment of them.

Moreover, as we all know, those subject to criticism in these articles have mastered the art of spinning when it comes to the media and propaganda. The Israeli lobby is quick to stamp all factually backed criticism as ‘anti-Semitic’ and attack it as such. The Turkish lobby, in this regard, as with everything else, follows its Israeli mentors; they label all dissent and criticism as anti-Turkey, or, Kurdish or Armenian propaganda; while the Saudi lobby goes around kicking and screaming ‘anti-Muslim propaganda.’ I am not known to be ‘politically correct’ and am often criticized for it. I readily accept that and all responsibilities associated with it. I am not seeking a position as a diplomat, neither am I serving any business, organization, or media channel furthering a particular ideology. This is me, saying it as I see it; no more, no less. By the end of this series it should be obvious, at least for many, that the selection of the nations encompasses varied sides and affiliations. Moreover, the main purpose, and the target of these commentaries, goes to the heart of our own government and its epicenter; lobbyists and the MIC.

Many Americans, due to the effective propaganda and spin machine of Turkey’s agents in the U.S., and relentless efforts by high-level officials and lobbying groups on Turkish networks’ payroll, do not know much about Turkey; its position and importance in the areas of terrorism, money laundering, illegal arms sales, industrial and military espionage, and the nuclear black-market. Not many people in the States would name Turkey among those nations that threaten global security, the fight against terrorism, nuclear proliferation, or the war on drugs. For the purpose of this article it is necessary to have at least a rudimentary knowledge of Turkey, its strategic location within global criminal networks, its various networks and entities operating behind seemingly legitimate fronts, and its connection to the military and political machine in the U.S.

For many Americans Turkey is one of the closest allies of the United States; a most important member of NATO; a candidate for EU membership; and the only Middle-Eastern close ally and partner of Israel. Some acknowledge Turkey’s highly prized status in the United States due to its location as the artery connecting Europe to Asia, its cross borders with Iran, Iraq and Syria to its East and South, with the Balkan states to its west, and with the Central Asian nations to its north and northeast. Others may recognize the country as one of the top U.S. customers for military technology and weapons.

Interestingly enough, these same qualities and characteristics which make Turkey an important ally and strategic partner for the nation states, make it extremely crucial and attractive to global criminal networks active in transferring illegal arms and nuclear technology to rogue states; in transporting Eastern Narcotics, mainly from Afghanistan through the Central Asian states into Turkey, where it is processed, and then through the Balkan states into Western Europe and the U.S.; and in laundering the proceeds of these illegal operations via its banks and those on the neighboring island of Cyprus.

The Real Lords of the Poppy Fields

It is a known fact that there often is a nexus between terrorism and organized crime. Terrorists use Narco-traficking and international crime to support their activities. Frequently, the same criminal gangs involved in narcotics smuggling have links to other criminal activities, such as illegal arms sales, and to terrorist groups. The Taliban’s link to the drug trade is irrefutable. In 2001, a report by the U.N. Committee of Experts on Resolution 1333 for sanctions against the Taliban stated that “funds raised from the production and trade of opium and heroin are used by the Taliban to buy arms and war materials and to finance the training of terrorists and support the operation of extremists in neighboring countries and beyond.”

Afghanistan supplies almost 90% of the world’s heroin, which is the country’s main cash crop, contributing over $3 billion a year in illegal revenues to the Afghan economy, which equals 50% of the gross national product.  In 2004, according to the U.S. state department, 206,000 hectares were cultivated, a half a million acres, producing 4,000 tons of opium. “It is not only the largest heroin producer in the world, 206,000 hectares is the largest amount of heroin or of any drug that I think has ever been produced by any one country in any given year,” says Robert Charles, former assistant secretary of state for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, overseeing anti-drug operations in Afghanistan.

Heroin trafficking is also the main source of funding for the al-Qaeda terrorists. A Time Magazine article in August 2004 reported that al-Qaeda has established a smuggling network that is peddling Afghan heroin to buyers across the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, and in turn is using the drug revenues to purchase weapons and explosives. The article states: “…al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies are increasingly financing operations with opium sales. Anti-drug officials in Afghanistan have no hard figures on how much al-Qaeda and the Taliban are earning from drugs, but conservative estimates run into tens of millions of dollars.” Anti-drug officials say the only way to cut off al-Qaeda’s pipeline is to attack it at the source: by destroying the poppy farms themselves.  This year, Afghanistan’s opium harvest is expected to exceed 3,600 tons—enough to produce street heroin worth $36 billion.

Key congressional leaders have been pressing the Pentagon to crack down on the major drug traffickers in Afghanistan upon learning that Al Qaeda is relying more than ever on illicit proceeds from the heroin trade. Congressional investigators who returned from the region in 2004 found that traffickers are providing Osama bin Laden and other terrorists with heroin as funds from Saudi Arabia and other sources dry up. “We now know Al Qaeda’s dominant source of funding is the illegal sale of narcotics,” said Rep. Kirk-IL, a member of the House Appropriations foreign operations subcommittee, as reported by Washington Times. Rep. Kirk added that Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda terror organization is reaping $28 million a year in illicit heroin sales.

It is puzzling to observe that in reporting this major artery of terrorists’ funding, the U.S. mainstream media and political machine do not dare to go beyond the poppy fields of Afghanistan and the fairly insignificant low level Afghan warlords overseeing the crops. Think about it; we are talking about nearly $40 billion worth of products in the final stage. Do you believe that those primitive Afghan warlords, clad in shalvars, sporting long ragged beards, and walking with long sticks handle transportation, lab processing, more transportation, distribution, and sophisticated laundering of the proceeds? If yes, then think again. This multi billion-dollar industry requires highly sophisticated networks and people. So, who are the real lords of Afghanistan’s poppy fields?

For Al Qaeda’s network Turkey is a haven for its sources of funding. Turkish networks, along with Russians’, are the main players in these fields; they purchase the opium from Afghanistan and transport it through several Turkic speaking Central Asian states into Turkey, where the raw opium is processed into popular byproducts; then the network transports the final product into Western European and American markets via their partner networks in Albania. The networks’ banking arrangements in Turkey, Cyprus and Dubai are used to launder and recycle the proceeds, and various Turkish companies in Turkey and Central Asia are used to make this possible and seem legitimate. The Al Qaeda network also uses Turkey to obtain and transfer arms to its Central Asian bases, including Chechnya.

Since the 1950s Turkey has played a key role in channeling into Europe and the U.S. heroin produced in the “Golden Triangle” comprised of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. These operations are run by mafia groups closely controlled by the MIT (Turkish Intelligence Agency) and the military. According to statistics compiled in 1998, Turkey’s heroin trafficking brought in $25 billion in 1995 and $37.5 billion in 1996. That amount makes up nearly a quarter of Turkey’s GDP. Only criminal networks working in close cooperation with the police and the army could possibly organize trafficking on such a scale. The Turkish government, MIT and the Turkish military, not only sanctions, but also actively participates in and oversees the narcotics activities and networks.

In July 1998, Le Monde Diplomatique reported that in an explosive document made public at a press conference in Istanbul, the MIT, Turkish Intelligence Agency, accused Turkey’s national police, of having “provided police identity cards and diplomatic passports to members of a group which, in the guise of anti-terrorist activities, traveled to Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Hungary and Azerbaijan to engage in drug trafficking”. MIT provided a list of names of some of the traffickers operating under the protection of the police. The Turkish police returned the compliment and handed over a list of named drug traffickers employed by the MIT!

In January 1997, Tom Sackville, minister of state at the British Home Office, stated that 80% of the heroin seized in Britain came from Turkey, and that his government was concerned by reports that members of the Turkish police, and even of the Turkish government, were involved in drug trafficking.

In an article published in Drug Link Magazine, Adrian Gatton cites the case of Huseyin Baybasin, the famous Turkish heroin kingpin now in jail in Holland. Baybasin explains: “I handled the drugs which came through the channel of the Turkish Consulate in England,” and he adds: “I was with the Mafia but I was carrying this out with the same Mafia group in which the rulers of Turkey were part.” The article also cites a witness statement given to a UK immigration case involving Baybasin’s clan, and states that Huseyin Baybasin had agreed to provide investigators with information about what he knew of the role of Turkish politicians and officials in the heroin trade.  The article quotes Mark Galeotti, a former UK intelligence officer and expert on the Turkish mafia, “Since the 1970s, Turkey has accounted for between 75 and 90 per cent of all heroin in the UK. The key traffickers are Turks or criminals who operate along that route using Turkish contacts.” In 2001, Chris Harrison, a senior UK Customs officer in Manchester, told veteran crime reporter Martin Short that Customs could not get at the Turkish kingpins because they are “protected” at a high level.

In 1998, the highly official International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) of the U.S. State Department, revealed that “about 75% of the heroin seized in Europe is either produced in, or derives from, Turkey”, that “4 to 6 tons of heroin arrive from there every month, heading for Western Europe” and that “a number of laboratories for the purification of the opium used in transforming the basic morphine into heroin are located on Turkish soil”. The report stresses that Turkey is one of the countries most affected by money-laundering, which takes place particularly via the countries of the ex-Soviet Union, such as Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan, through the medium of casinos, the construction industry, and tourism. INCSR’s 2006 report cites Turkey as a major transshipment point and base of operations for international narcotics traffickers and associates trafficking in opium, morphine base, heroin, precursor chemicals and other drugs.

We know that Al Qaeda and Taliban’s main source of funding is the illegal sale of narcotics. Based on all the reports, facts, and expert statements, we know that Turkey is a major, if not the top, player in the transportation, processing, and distribution of all the narcotics derived from the Afghan poppies, and as a result, it is the major contributing country to Al Qaeda. Yet, to date, more than five years into our over exhaustive ‘war on terror propaganda’, have we heard any mentioning of, any tough message to, any sanction against, or any threat that was issued and targeted at Turkey?

We all know of our president’s ‘selective evilization’ of countries that have been ‘chosen’ to be on our hit list. But how many of us know of our government’s ‘selective go free cards’ that have been issued to those ‘ally countries’ that directly fund and support the terrorist networks? In fact, our government would rather move heaven and earth, gag ‘whistleblowers’ with direct knowledge of these facts, classify congressional and other investigative reports, create a media black-out on these ‘allies’ terrorist supporting activities, than do the right thing; do what it really takes to counter terrorism.

…and the WMDs we actually located & have known about

In his 2002 State of the Union address, President Bush declared he would keep “the world’s most destructive weapons” from Al Qaeda and its allies by keeping those weapons from evil governments. Later he told a campaign audience in Pennsylvania, “We had to take a hard look at every place where terrorists might get those weapons and one regime stood out: the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.” Well, the Iraqi WMD that never was!

Here is what CIA Director Porter Goss said bluntly before the Senate Intelligence Committee in February 2004, “It may be only a matter of time before Al Qaeda or other groups attempt to use chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons. We must focus on that.” And we know that he knows; has known for the longest time!

Seymour Hersh in his March 2003 article quotes Robert Gallucci, a former United Nations weapons inspector who is now dean of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, “Bad as it is with Iran, North Korea, and Libya having nuclear-weapons material, the worst part is that they could transfer it to a non-state group. That’s the biggest concern, and the scariest thing about all this. There’s nothing more important than stopping terrorist groups from getting nuclear weapons.”

Although numerous prestigious reports by agencies and organizations such as IAEA, and news articles in the European media, have clearly established Turkey, and various international networks operating in and out of Turkey, as major players within the global nuclear black-market and illegal arms sales, the relevant agencies and main media in the U.S. have maintained a completely silent and hands off position.

Nuclear black-market related activities depend on Turkey for manufacturing nuclear components, and on its strategic location as a transit point to move goods and technology to nations such as Iran, Pakistan, and others. Not only that, Turkey’s status and close relationship with the U.S. enables it to obtain (steal) technology and information from the U.S.

Lying at the crossroads not only between Europe and Asia, but also between the former Soviet Union and the Middle East, Turkey is already a well-established transit zone for illicit goods, including nuclear material and illegal weapons sales. According to a report by Turkish Atomic Energy Authority (TAEA), at least 104 nuclear smuggling incidents had occurred in the past eight years in Turkey. For instance, in September 1999, 5 Kilograms of Uranium enriched to 4.6 percent were confiscated from an international smuggling ring in Turkey, which included four Turkish, one Azerbaijani, and three Kazakhstani citizens. The report cites over one hundred incidents like this, and these are only cases that have been intercepted and reported.

Turkey played a major role in Pakistan and Libya’s illicit activities in obtaining nuclear technologies. In June 2004, Stephen Fidler, a reporter for Financial Times reported that in 2003,Turkish centrifuge motors and converters destined for Libya’s nuclear weapons program turned up in Tripoli aboard a ship that had sailed from Dubai. One of those detained individuals in this incident, a ‘respected and successful’ Turkish Businessman, Selim Alguadis, was cited in a public report from the Malaysian inspector-general of police into the Malaysian end of a Pakistani-led clandestine network that supplied Libya, Iran and North Korea with nuclear weapons technologies, designs and expertise. According to the report, “he supplied these materials to Libya.” Mr. Alguadis also confessed that he had on several occasions met A Q Khan, the disgraced Pakistani scientist who has admitted transmitting nuclear expertise to the three countries. Selim Alguadis remains a successful businessman in Turkey with companies in several other countries. He was released immediately after being turned over to Turkish authorities. His partner, another well-known and internationally recognized wealthy businessman, Gunes Cire, also actively participated in transferring nuclear technology and parts to Iran, Pakistan and North Korea. Although under investigation by several international communities, Alguadis and his partners continued to roam free in Turkey and conduct their illegitimate operations via their ‘legit international business’ front companies.

David Albright and Corey Hinderstein of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) identify Turkey’s major role in the nuclear black-market. According to their report, workshops in Turkey made the centrifuge motor and frequency converters used to drive the motor and spin the rotor to high speeds. These workshops imported subcomponents from Europe, and they assembled these centrifuge items in Turkey. Under false end-user certificates, these components were shipped from Turkey to Dubai for repackaging and shipment to Libya.

Turkey’s illegal arms smuggling activities are not limited to Europe and the Middle East; many of these activities reach U.S. soil. According to a report published by the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, in April 2004 the Italian police searched a container destined for the port of New York onboard a Turkish ship at the port of Tauro during a routine customs inspection, sparked by discrepancies between the various customs declarations. Inside the container more than 8,000 AK47 assault rifles, 11 submachine guns, and magazines worth over seven million dollars were discovered.

Our tough talking president works very hard to sound convincing when he says ‘we have to take a hard look at every place where terrorists might get those weapons;’ in fact, he has succeeded in fooling many into believing those words. However, while he was determined to move heaven and earth to get our nation into a war and a quagmire with a country that did NOT possess ‘those weapons,’ he refused and continues to refuse to look at his own ‘allies-packed backyard’ where he would find a few that not only do possess ‘those weapons,’ but also distribute and sell them to the highest bidders no matter what their affiliation.

 

Curiously enough, despite these highly publicized reports and acknowledgements of Turkey’s role in these activities, Turkey continues to receive billions of dollars of aid and assistance annually from the United States. With its highly placed co-conspirators and connections within the Pentagon, State Department and U.S. Congress, Turkey never has to fear potential sanctions or meaningful scrutiny; just like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The criminal Turkish networks continue their global criminal activities right under the nose of their protector, the United States, and neither the catastrophe falling upon the U.S. on September Eleven, nor their direct and indirect role and ties to this terrorist attack, diminish their role and participation in the shady worlds of narcotics, money laundering and illegal arms transfer.

The ‘respectable’ Turkish companies established and operate bases in Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and other similar former soviet states. Many of these front companies, disguised under construction and tourism entities, have received millions of dollars in grants from the U.S. government, allocated to them by the U.S. congress, to establish and operate criminal networks throughout the region; among their networking partners are Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Albanian Mafia. While the U.S. government painted Islamic charity organizations as the main financial source for Al Qaeda terrorists, it was hard at work trying to cover up the terrorists’ main financial source: narcotics and illegal arms sales. Why?

For years and years, information and evidence being collected by the counterintelligence operations of certain U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies has been prevented from being transferred to criminal and narcotics divisions, and from being shared with the Drug Enforcement Agency and others with prosecutorial power. Those with direct knowledge have been prevented from making this information available and public by various gag orders and invocation of the State Secrets Privilege. Why?

Is this due to the fact that the existence and survival of many U.S. allies; Turkey, almost all Central Asian nations, and after the September Eleven attack, Afghanistan; greatly depend on cultivating, processing, transporting, and distributing these illegal substances? Is it caused by the fact that a major source of income for those who procure U.S. weapons and technology, our military industrial complex’s bread and butter, is being generated from this illegal production and illegal dealings? Or, is it the fear of exposing our own financial institutions, lobbying firms, and certain elected and appointed officials, as beneficiaries?

When it comes to criminal and shady global networks most people envision either Mafiosi like entities who keep to themselves and are separated from society, or, street level gangster-like criminals. Contrary to these expectations, the top tier Turkish criminal networks consist mainly of respectable looking businessmen, some of whom are among the top international businessmen, diplomats, politicians, and scholarly individuals. Their U.S. counterparts are equally respected and recognizable; some of whom are high-level appointed bureaucrats within the State Department and the Pentagon; some are elected officials, and others consist of the combination of the two who have now set up their own companies and lobbying groups.

 

The American Turkish Council (ATC)

Operating tax-free and under the radar is one of the most powerful “non-profit” associations in the U.S., the American Turkish Council (ATC). Some who are familiar with its operations and players describe it as ‘Mini AIPAC;’ this description aces it. ATC followed the AIPAC model; with the direct help of AIPAC & JINSA, it created a base out of which to stretch its tentacles, reaching the highest echelons of our government. While the ATC is an association in name and in charter, the reality is that it and other affiliated associations are the U.S. government, lobbyists, foreign agents, and MIC. Investigative journalist, John Stanton, correctly describes the ATC as an extraordinary group of elite and interconnected Republicans, Democrats and corporate and military heavyweights who are spearheading one of the most ambitious strategic gambits in U.S. history.

Included in ATC’s management, board of directors, and advisors; in addition to Turkish individuals of ‘interest;’ is a dizzying array of U.S. individuals. The ATC is led by Ret. General Brent Scowcroft, who serves as Chairman of the Board; George Perlman of Lockheed Martin, the Executive Vice President; other board members include: Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, Ret. General Elmer Pendleton, Ret. General Joseph Ralston, Ret. Col. Preston Hughes, Alan Colegrove of Northrop Grumman, Frank Carlucci of Carlyle Group, Christine Vick of Cohen Group, Representative Robert Wexler, Former Rep. Ed Whitfield…Basically many formers; statesmen, ‘dime a dozen generals,’ and representatives.

On the members – paying clients – side; their list includes all the MIC’s who’s who, such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman; the Washington Lobby scene’s who’s who; The Cohen Group, The Livingston Group, Washington Group International…

Of course, there are also many Turkish companies that are members of the ATC. Most of these companies have branches and operations in Libya, Dubai, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan. Although the official listings of their businesses are cited as ‘construction,’ ‘real estate’, ‘manufacturing,’ and ‘tourism’; the main activities of these businesses are known to be related to global illegal arms sales and narcotic processing and trafficking. These companies provide necessary fronts and channels to launder proceeds. Curiously enough, hundreds of millions of dollars have been granted by the United States government, approved by the congress, to these Turkish companies under the guise of various ‘U.S. Central Asian development programs;’ and ‘Iraq & Afghanistan reconstruction programs.’

Stanton notes: ‘ATC is joined in the creation of the New EuroAsia by the American Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce (AACC). AACC’s Honorary Council of Advisors just happens to have General Scowcroft and the following persons of significance: Henry Kissinger and James Baker III. Former Council members include Dick Cheney and Richard Armitage, and Board of Trustee members include media-overkill subject Richard Perle of AEI, and Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas.’

The MIC Factor

In part1 we discussed the MIC as ‘agents by default;’ marriages and loyalties based on ‘mutual benefit;’ our previous example was Saudi Arabia, top customer of U.S. weaponry. Well, Turkey only tails the Saudis slightly in that category; between 1992 and 1996, Turkey was the second largest importer of weaponry, spending more than $7 billion in four years. A report by the World Policy Institute shows that Turkey is the third largest recipient of U.S. military aid, behind Israel and Egypt. Between 1994 and 2003, Turkey took delivery of more than $6.8 billion in U.S. weaponry and services.

In fiscal year 1989, U.S. aid to Turkey was $563,500,000. According to a Multi National Monitor Report, in 1991, Turkey received more than $800 million in U.S. aid, “an exceptional return” on its $3.8 million investment in Washington lobbyists. At the time, International Advisors, INC. (Douglas Feith & Richard Perle lobbying firm as registered agents for Turkey) was paid more than $1 million for representing Turkey in the U.S. for the purpose of securing these types of deals. In 2003, Turkey received a $1 billion aid package. During this period their registered and known lobbyists were the Livingston Group, headed by the former Speaker of the House Bob Livingston, and Solarz Associates, headed by a formerly powerful Representative, Stephen Solarz. Turkey, from 2000 to 2004, for only four years, paid Livingston $9 million for his lobbying services. What did the Republic of Turkey get for its $2 million per year investment in Ex-Congressman Livingston’s services?

A Joint Report by the Federation of American Scientists and the World Policy Institute found that the vast majority of U.S. arms transfers to Turkey were subsidized by U.S. taxpayers. In many cases, these taxpayer funds are supporting military production and employment in Turkey, not in the United States. Of the $10.5 billion in U.S. weaponry delivered to Turkey since 1984, $8 billion in all has been directly or indirectly financed by grants and subsidized loans provided by the U.S. government. Many of the largest deals – such as Lockheed Martin’s sale of 240 F-16s to the Turkish air force and the FMC Corporation’s provision of 1,698 armored vehicles to the Turkish army – involve co-production and offset provisions which steer investments, jobs, and production to Turkey as a condition of the sale. For example, Turkey’s F-16 assembly plant in Ankara – a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) – employs 2,000 production workers, almost entirely paid for with U.S. tax dollars.

Let’s recap the above data: Not only does our government, actually, our taxpayers, subsidize $8 billion of Turkey’s $10 billion weapons purchases; the production of this weaponry and the associated employment occurs not in the U.S., but overseas, in Turkey. We, the taxpayers, are subsidizing these purchases; our nation readily transfers its technology to a country that ranks high in global narcotics, terrorist and WMD related activities; while a select few MIC related firms such as Lockheed and the pimping middlemen, the lobbyists, get fatter and richer.

One Stop Shop: The Cohen Group

Like many other former statesmen, William Cohen, former Secretary of Defense, dived into the business of lobbying and consulting, and created his own Washington firm, The Cohen Group, which works for some of the largest companies in the defense industry, such as Lockheed Martin, and serves numerous foreign players. The Cohen Group is one of the primary and most active members of the American Turkish Council (ATC). Cohen’s client, Lockheed Martin, happens to be on the board of ATC, in addition to being listed as ATC’s top paying client.

The group claims on its Website that its principals have “a century and a half of combined experience in the Congress, the Defense Department, the State Department, the White House, and state and local governments” and that they “have developed extensive expertise and relationships with key international political, economic, and business leaders and acquired invaluable experiences with the individuals and institutions that affect our clients’ success abroad.” Abroad indeed. With a few ‘dime a dozen generals’ and former statesmen, the firm owes its phenomenal speedy success to interests ‘abroad’ and of course, the MIC! Let’s look, with great amazement, I hope, at how this ingenious lobby venture serves as foreign agent for several influences without having to register as such; with complete immunity against any scrutiny.

According to Intelligence Online, in its March 27, 2006 issue, Cohen accompanied Bush on his trip to India and Pakistan in March 2006. The Cohen Group is very active in India; Joseph Ralston, Cohen’s Vice Chairman, led two delegations of U.S. Defense Chiefs to India the previous year. The trips were organized in conjunction with the U.S. India Business Council; among the participants were Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.

On June 9, 2006, Intelligence Online reports ‘already operating in India, the Cohen Group headed by William Cohen, has just opened an office in Beijing… Since 2003 the Cohen Group has equally been employing Christine Vick. She is a former Vice President of Kissinger Associates; the consultancy founded by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and had been in charge of the firm’s Chinese business.’

Prior to the October 2005 release of Paul Volcker’s report on violations of the United Nations’ Iraq oil-for-food program, the Australian wheat exporter AWB Limited hired Cohen’s firm. AWB paid approximately $A300 million in trucking fees on its wheat contracts to a Jordanian company, Alia, which owns no trucks! The funds were funnelled to Saddam’s regime. AWB hired Cohen Group as part of its ‘strategy, ’ code-named ‘Project Rose’, to deal with the UN inquiry headed by Paul Volcker and corruption allegations made against it by U.S. wheat farmers and ‘hostile US politicians.’ Cohen Group is not a law firm; what kind of services and representation is it providing for this criminal case?

So who are the key players at Cohen’s lobby firm, giving it its value? Well of course, a handful of powerful formers; in addition to Cohen as the top principal we have former Undersecretary of State Mark Grossman, and two formerly high-level ‘dime a dozen generals:’ General Joseph Ralston and General Paul Kern; let’s briefly look at them; shall we?

Ret. General Paul Kern

Cohen Group senior counselor is retired general Paul J. Kern, a former head of the Army Materiel Command, who recently served on a panel convened by the Defense Department to recommend improvements in how it acquires weapons systems; of course, a topic of great interest to Cohen clients.

Pentagon’s Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment Panel , DAPAP, was created to recommend changes in the awarding of military contracts. Over half of this panel is executives of large defense corporations. Among the Committee’s six members are Frank Cappuccio, VP of Lockheed Martin, and retired General Kern, who is the Senior Counselor of the Cohen Group!

When the Pentagon is informed of wasteful practices, it commonly ignores them. Congressman Walter Jones, (R-N.C.) is quoted as understating, “We’ve got an agency that is not doing its job of being a watchdog for the taxpayers.” Retired Army Reserve officer Paul Fellencer Sr. complained to the Pentagon’s fraud hot line last year about $200-million worth of outrageous overpayments for ordinary supplies. Pentagon investigators never bothered to call him and dismissed his tip as “unsubstantiated,” the news service said.

One wonders how many American citizens are aware of the fact that a ‘dime a dozen general’ such as Kern, who happens to be a Senior Counsel of a lobby firm with foreign interests and MIC representation, who happens to sit on the board of Lockheed Martin, gets to sit on a panel that monitors and advises on awarding military contracts to the private MIC companies by the Pentagon. Would it take an absolute genius to figure out that this is ‘putting a fox in charge of the hen house’? If not, then how could this get past the decision makers at the Pentagon? How come our lawmakers, those in charge of ensuring the checks and balances in our government, those we consider our representatives, sit there either unaware or unbothered by this red flag visible from a hundred miles away? What happened to ‘investigative journalists with good noses;’ were they all inflicted by congested sinuses at the same time?

 Fmr. Gen. Joseph Ralston

General Joseph Ralston, one of Cohen Group’s Vice Chairmen, is on the board of Lockheed Martin, which paid the Cohen Group $550,000 in 2005, according to a Lockheed filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Ralston is also a member of the 2006 Advisory Board of the American Turkish Council (ATC), and one of Turkey’s top advocates. If you think this ‘dime a dozen general’ ended one career and removed himself from the U.S. government by becoming ‘the foreign agent man,’ think again after reading the following.

On August 28, 2006, the U.S. State Department appointed the former U.S. Air Force General, current Vice Chairman of the Cohen Group, board member of American Turkish Council, registered lobbyist for Lockheed Martin, Joseph Ralston, as a “Special Envoy” for countering the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK)! Lo and behold, Ralston’s appointment came as Turkey was finalizing the purchase of 30 new Lockheed Martin F-16 aircraft valued at $3 billion, and as Turkey was due to make its decision on the $10 billion purchase of the new Lockheed Martin F-35 JSF aircraft. Coincidentally, the U.S. Congress approved the sale of the F-16s to Turkey in October 2006, shortly after Ralston’s return from Turkey.

While the implications of Ralston’s appointment caused a major stir within the Kurdish community and organizations, mainly pointing to Ralston’s position with the Turkish lobby in the U.S. (he is on the board of ATC), and within Turkey’s own communities, pointing to Ralston’s position with Lockheed Martin (he is on the board of Lockheed Martin), our own media, watchdog organizations, and congress let this gargantuan conflict of interest pass under the radar.

Our government sent this man, Ralston, as a special envoy to help resolve the highly critical Northern Iraq situation with possible dire consequences in the near future. Considering Ralston’s livelihood and his loyalties, as a member of the board of the directors of Lockheed Martin, as the vice chairman of a lobbying firm with foreign interests, as an advisor and board member for the most powerful Turkish Lobby group, ATC, who did this man represent while in Turkey as the special envoy? What interests did he really represent; Iraq’s situation, Lockheed’s livelihood, which depends on further conflicts and bloodshed; the corrupt and criminal government of Turkey and its representation via ATC; or, the furthering of the Cohen Group’s future pimping opportunities?

Why in the world did no one within the U.S. mainstream media give even the slightest coverage of this conflict of interest? Why did no one, Democrat or Republican, in our congress make a peep? Why haven’t we heard anyone asking Ralston the most important question, in dire need of an answer: ‘Who’s your daddy Ralston; boy?’ Ralston’s position is no different than what is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as: “A person conceived and born out of wedlock.” With the possibility of any one of four daddies, and without the benefit of a DNA test, how do we go about determining Ralston’s real daddy?

Fmr. Undersecretary Marc Grossman

The second Vice Chairman of Cohen’s firm is Marc Grossman, who was the U.S. Undersecretary for Political Affairs in the State Department from 2001 until 2005.  From November 1994 to June 1997, he served as U.S. Ambassador to Turkey. In January 2005 Grossman resigned from his position and joined the Cohen Group. In late December 2005, Grossman joined Ihlas Holding, a large and alleged shady Turkish company which is also active in several Central Asian countries. Grossman is reported to receive $100,000 per month for his advisory position with Ihlas.’ Most and foremost, Grossman is known for his extraordinarily cozy relationship with Turkey and Israel; followed by Pakistan.

Here is Grossman as the key speaker at an ATC conference in March 2002; while Undersecretary of State; and here it is followed by Grossman’s visit to Turkey in December 2002, to approve the $3 billion U.S. aid to Turkey for the Iraq Cooperation deal. There he goes again, Grossman back to Turkey in December 2003 re: approval of Turkey’s eligibility to participate in tenders for Iraq’s reconstruction! Here is Grossman as the key speaker at an ATC Conference held at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in December 2004, while Undersecretary. Here is Grossman as the guest of honor and key speaker at the American Turkish Society dinner in New York in February 2005, while Undersecretary. Here he is again, at the lavish Turkish Ottoman Dinner Gala in November 2005. Here is Grossman at the award dinner gala by the Turkish lobby group, the Assembly of American Turkish Association (ATAA), in Chicago, receiving his award in November 2005.  Here is Grossman as the key speaker at the ATC annual conference in March 2006, and later, in June 2006, at the MERIA Conference to discuss Turkey’s importance to the U.S. & Israel. This list can go on for pages and pages; but I believe you all get it; right?

Here is a comment by Wolfowitz during his visit to Turkey: ”I’m delighted to be back in Turkey and so is my colleague Marc Grossman, who feels like Turkey is a second home.” Second home indeed, Mr. Grossman!

Please do not make the grave and naive mistake of assuming that Grossman found and obtained his highly lucrative and questionable positions after his resignation in January 2005. Within two months after his confident resignation, this boy got the vice chairmanship of the Cohen Group. Only six months later, Grossman ended up securing a ‘special advisory’ position for a foreign company that reported his monthly fee at $100,000 a month. The industrious Grossman seems to be juggling so many balls simultaneously: numerous foreign sponsored dinner speeches, the demanding pimping activities of Cohen’s firm, the very ‘special advising’ of a shady foreign company…

We all have a pretty good idea how long and how much work it takes to secure that level of income and those positions. Did Grossman beat the odds and get lucky as soon as he got out of the State Department? Did he hit the jackpot? Or, did he diligently and industriously work at it, while in his position as the ambassador to Turkey and as Deputy Secretary of State? Did he sell his soul while under his oath of office? Did he sell our government’s soul? Did he sell our nation and its interests? If so; for what and how much?

Long gone are the days when generals were content to retire and go back home where they held their heads high as honorable patriots and heroes who had served their nation; where they marched in their towns’ parades as proud distinguished men and women who had fulfilled their duty to the people. Today, as we clearly see, they perceive themselves and their authority as a commodity; they go about marketing their worth (nationally and internationally; foreign and domestic) long before they leave their positions as public servants.

The same goes for many of our statesmen. While in office, Grossman and others like him appear to have one objective in mind and in action: to make sure that their future employer who is waiting for them on the other side of the revolving door will receive special and lucrative arrangements so that they can be compensated handsomely later.

In Part1, we briefly described the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), established to insure that the American public and its lawmakers know the source of propaganda intended to sway public opinion, policy, and laws; and the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) of 1995, which was passed to make the regulation and disclosure of lobbying the federal government more effective. The article emphasized that both of these cosmetic laws are filled with exemptions and loopholes that allow minimization of, and in some cases complete escape from, warranted scrutiny, and have serious loopholes and limitations.

The Cohen Group is an excellent case, illustrating the futility of FARA, since the firm does not have to be registered. They can claim that Turkey is not their ‘direct’ client; they can argue that they are not getting paid ‘directly’ by the government of Turkey or any other foreign entity or government. They certainly can; no matter that Grossman receives hundreds of thousands of dollars from a dubious Turkish company. Does Cohen discount Grossman’s Vice Chairmanship salary accordingly? No matter that half a million dollars per year from their client Lockheed Martin is mainly for services provided to Turkey, and having the group’s second chairman serve on Lockheed’s board is another way to get around all restrictions. The incestuous relationship twists and turns: The Cohen Group on the board of ATC, The Cohen Group a paying member client of ATC, The Cohen Group as Lockheed’s lobbyist, Cohen’s men on the board of Lockheed, Lockheed on the board of ATC, Lockheed also a paying client of ATC…How is your head; spinning yet?

We are proud of the large turnout at the ballot box for the midterm elections a few weeks ago; a sign of participatory citizenship. Perhaps we’ll be repeating this phenomenon, if not increasing it, for the presidential elections in two years; another means to demonstrate our ‘democratic government process in action’ for badly needed change. But who really runs our country? Who really shapes our public policies and determines the flow of our hard-earned tax money entrusted to our government? If you had the patience to go through this article, which sheds light on only a fragment of what really takes place behind our backs, within the halls of our government, in all three branches, you would start questioning your significance as a voter and taxpayer, and you would begin wondering whether you are governed by who you think you are.

The foreign influence, the lobbyists, the current highly positioned civil servants who are determined future ‘wanna be’ lobbyists, and the fat cats of the Military Industrial Complex, operate successfully under the radar, with unlimited reach and power, with no scrutiny, while selling your interests, benefiting from your tax money, and serving the highest bidders regardless of what or who they may be.  This deep state seems to operate at all levels of our government; from the President’s office to Congress, from the military quarters to the civil servants’ offices. Let’s let Marcus Cicero’s timeless warning from over two thousand years ago put the finishing touch on this article:

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder[er] is less to fear.– – Marcus Tullius Cicero


MAE YOUNG ALLEN OBITUARY

05/27/2012

SPARTANBURG, SCMae Young Allen, 96, of Spartanburg, passed away Wednesday, May 23, 2012, at Spartanburg Regional Hospice Home from the stress of major spinal surgery. Born Nannie Mae Young on October 28, 1915, in Montpelier, Louisiana, she was the widow of Edgar Lee Allen and daughter of the late Edwin and Annie George Young.
Mae attended college at what is now Spartanburg Methodist College, where she met and married Edgar and they had two children, Jean and Michael Allen. Michael passed away from brain and spinal cancer on August 25, 2010, and left Mae with two grandsons, Christopher and Mathew. Christopher is in medical school at Saba Medical School in Saba, Netherlands Antilles, and Mathew, a rising cellist star is attending the Cleveland Institute of Music. Jean is married to James P. Harvey, and resides in Hendersonville NC, but has been in constant attendance at her mother’s side since her injury on April 14, 2012.
Mae and Edgar were Charter members of Morningside Baptist Church and loved their church family. Mae was a member of the Loyalty and Rebekah Sunday School Classes and truly loved her class friends. She was a devoted Braves fan and spent her married life as a homemaker, wonderful cook, seamstress, and loved canning and freezing the bounty of her husband’s large garden. After Jean was in college, Mae worked at Belk’s on Main Street for eleven years in the men’s department. She had a good eye for helping gentlemen choose a suit and coordinating accessories. Her attention to detail, though unimposing, brought back satisfied customers for many years.
In the last 10 years at Summit Hills, she participated in many activities, especially her exercise class three days a week. She formed priceless new friendships there and will be remembered for her sweet and gentle nature. When people commented on her astounding health at her age, she always said, “I have been blessed in so many ways.” Her family feels like they were blessed for having her as their mother, counselor, and teacher by example.
Visitation will be 1:30-2:30 PM Sunday, May 27, 2012, at Floyd’s Greenlawn Chapel. A funeral service will follow at 3:00 PM in the Chapel, conducted by the Rev. Dr. Kirk H. Neely and the Rev. Mike McGee. Burial will be in Greenlawn Memorial Gardens.
Memorials may be made to Morningside Baptist Church, 897 South Pine Street, Spartanburg, SC 29302; or Spartanburg Regional Hospice Home, 686 Jeff Davis Drive, Spartanburg, SC 29303.
The family wishes to express their sincere appreciation to the staff of Mary Black Memorial Hospital and Spartanburg Regional Hospice Home for the love and care they gave to Mae. The family also wishes to express their appreciation for the compassionate assistance at The J. F. Floyd Mortuary.
An online guest register is available at www.floydmortuary.com
Floyd’s Greenlawn Chapel

Published in Spartanburg Herald-Journal from May 26 to May 27, 2012

Author: James P. Harvey


Passing on to a better place.

05/22/2012

05 22 12 After a five hour back surgery, my 96 year old Mother in Law has been transferred to a Hospice Center with my Wife in constant attendance these last five weeks. Therefore, posting will be sporadic until further notice.

Between the two sites, there are over 800 articles in the archives for your reading pleasure. http://anationbeguiled.com and  https://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com

 

Personal details are available via email to my friends.

 

OldDog

olddog@anationbeguiled.com


AGENDA 21 CONSPIRACY THEORY OR THREAT

05/21/2012

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom214.htm

by Tom DeWeese

NewsWithViews.com

The battle over Agenda 21 is raging across the nation. City and County Councils have become war zones as citizens question the origins of development plans and planners deny any international connections to the UN’s Agenda 21. What is the truth? Since I helped start this war, I believe it is up to me to help with the answers.

The standard points made by those who deny any Agenda 21 connection is that:

Local planning is a local idea.
Agenda 21 is a non-binding resolution not a treaty, carries no legal authority from which any nation is bound to act. It has no teeth.
The UN has no enforcement capability.
There are no “Blue-Helmeted” UN troops at City Hall.
Planners are simply honest professionals trying to do their job, and all these protests are wasting their valuable time.
The main concern of Agenda 21 is that man is fouling the environment and using up resources for future generations and we just need a sensible plan to preserve and protect the earth. What is so bad about that?
There is no hidden agenda.
“I’ve read Agenda 21 and I can find no threatening language that says it is a global plot. What are you so afraid of?”
And of course, the most often heard response – “Agenda 21, what’s that?”
And after they have proudly stated these well thought out points, they arrogantly throw down the gauntlet and challenge us to “answer these facts.”
Well, first I have a few questions of my own that I would love to have answered.

Will one of these “innocent” promoters of the “Agenda 21 is meaningless” party line, please answer the following:

If it all means nothing, why does the UN spend millions of dollars to hold massive international meetings in which hundreds of leaders, potentates and high priests attend, along with thousands of non-governmental organizations of every description, plus the international news media, which reports every action in breathless anticipation of its impact on the world?

It if all means nothing, why do those same NGO representatives (which are all officially sanctioned by the UN in order to participate) spend months (sometimes years) debating, discussing, compiling, and drafting policy documents?

If it all means nothing, why do leaders representing nearly every nation in the world attend and, with great fanfare, sign these policy documents?

Time after time we witness these massive international meetings, we read the documents that result from them, and when we question their meaning or possible impact on our nation, we are met with a dismissive shrug and a comment of “oh, probably not much…”

Really? Then why? Why the waste of money, time, and human energy? Could it be that the only purpose is to simply give diplomats, bureaucrats, and NGOs a feeling of purpose in their meaningless lives, or perhaps a chance to branch out of their lonely apartments? Or could it really be that these meetings and the documents they produce are exactly as we say they are – a blueprint for policy, rules, regulations, perhaps even global governance that will affect the lives, fortunes, property and futures of every person on earth? Which is it? You can’t have it both ways.

Why the fear of Agenda 21?

Those who simply read or quickly scan Agenda 21 are puzzled by our opposition to what they see as a harmless, non-controversial document which they read as voluntary suggestions for preserving natural resources and protecting the environment. Why the fear? What exactly bothers us so much?

The problem is, we who oppose Agenda 21 have read and studied much more than this one document and we’ve connected the dots. Many of us have attended those international meetings, rubbed elbows with the authors and leaders of the advocated policies, and overheard their insider (not for public distribution) comments about their real purpose.

Here are a few examples of those comments made by major leaders of this movement as to the true purpose of the policies coming out of these UN meetings:

“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

Christine Stewart (former Canadian Minister of the Environment)

“The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation.” Report from the UN Commission on Global Governance.

“Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions and up through to the United Nations itself.” Report from the UN Commission on Global Governance.

All three of these quotes (and we have many) indicate using lies and rhetoric to achieve their goals, and that those goals include the elimination of national sovereignty and the creation of a “seamless system” for global governance. Again, do these quotes have meaning and purpose – do they reveal the true thoughts of the promoters of these policies, or were they just joking?

For the past three decades through the United Nations infrastructure, there have been a series of meetings, each producing another document or lynchpin to lay the groundwork for a centralized global economy, judicial system, military, and communications system, leading to what can only be described as a global government. From our study of these events, we have come to the conclusion that Agenda 21 represents the culmination of all of those efforts, indeed representing the step by step blueprint for the full imposition of those goals. Here’s just a sample of these meetings and the documents they produced:

In 1980, West German Chancellor Willy Brandt chaired the Commission on International Development. The document, or report coming out of this effort, entitled “North-South: A program for Survival,” stated “World development is not merely an economic process, [it] involves a profound transformation of the entire economic and social structure…not only the idea of economic betterment, but also of greater human dignity, security, justice and equality…The Commission realizes that mankind has to develop a concept of a ‘single community’ to develop global order.”

That same year Sean MacBride, a recipient of the Lenin Peace Prize, headed up a commission on international communications which issued a report entitled “Many Voices, One World: Towards a New, More Just and More Efficient World Information and Communication Order.” The Commission, which included the head of the Soviet news Agency, TASS, believed that a “New World Information Order” was prerequisite to a new world economic order. The report was a blueprint for controlling the media, even to the point of suggesting that international journalists be licensed.

In 1982, Olof Palme, the man who single-handedly returned Socialism to Sweden, served as chairman of the Independent Commission on Disarmament and Security Issues. His report, entitled “Common Security: A Blueprint for Survival,” said: “All States have the duty to promote the achievement of general and complete disarmament under effective international control…” The report went on to call for money that is saved from disarmament to be used to pay for social programs. The Commission also proposed a strategic shift from “collective security” such as the alliances like NATO, to one of “common security” through the United Nations.

Finally, in 1987, came the granddaddy commission of them all, The Brundtland Commission on Environment and Development. Headed by Gro Harlem Brundtland, Vice President of the World Socialist Party, the commission introduced the concept of “Sustainable Development.” For the first time the environment was tied to the tried and true Socialist goals of international redistribution of wealth. Said the report, “Poverty is a major cause and effect of global environmental problems. It is therefore futile to attempt to deal with environmental problems without a broader perspective that encompasses the factors underlying world poverty and international inequality.”

These four commissions laid the groundwork for an agenda of global control; A controlled media would dictate the flow of information and ideas and prevent dissent; control of international development manages and redistributes wealth; full disarmament would put the power structure into the hands of those with armaments; and tying environmentalism to poverty and economic development would bring the entire agenda to the level of an international emergency.

One world, one media, one authority for development, one source of wealth, one international army. The construction of a “just society” with political and social equality rather than a free society with the individual as the sole possessor of rights. The next step was to pull it altogether into a simple blueprint for implementation.

During the 1990s, the UN sponsored a series of summits and conferences dealing with such issues as human rights, the rights of the child, forced abortion and sterilization as solutions for population control, and plans for global taxation through the UN.

Throughout each of these summits, hundreds of Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) worked behind the scenes to write policy documents pertaining to each of these issues, detailing goals and a process to achieve them. These NGO’s are specifically sanctioned by the United Nations in order to participate in the process. The UN views them as “civil society, the non governmental representatives of the people. In short, in the eyes of the UN, the NGOs are the “people.”

Who are they? They include activist groups with private political agendas including the Environmental Defense Fund, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, Zero Population Growth, Planned Parenthood, the Sierra Club, the National Education Association, an d hundreds more. These groups all have specific political agendas which they desire to become law of the land. Through work in these international summits and conferences, their political wish lists become official government policy.

In fact, through the UN infrastructure the NGOs sit in equality to government officials from member nations including the United States. One of the most powerful UN operations is the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP). Created in 1973 by the UN General Assembly, the UNEP is the catalyst through which the global environmental agenda is implemented. Virtually all international environmental programs and policy changes that have occurred globally in the past three decades are a result of UNEP efforts. Sitting in on UNEP meetings, helping to write and implement policy, along with these powerful NGOs are government representatives, including U.S, federal agencies such as the Department of State, Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Fish and Wildlife Service.

This, then, is a glimpse of the power structure behind the force that gathered in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 for the UN-sponsored Earth Summit. Here, five major documents, written primarily by NGOs with the guidance and assistance of government agencies, were introduced to the world. In fact, these final documents had been first drafted and honed though the long, arduous series of international conferences previously mentioned. Now, at Rio, they were ready for adoption as a blueprint for what could only be described as the transformation of human society

The five documents were: the “Convention on Climate Change,” , precursor to the coming Kyoto Climate Change Protocol, later adopted in 1997; the “Biodiversity Treaty,” which would declare that massive amounts of land should be off limits to human development; the third document was called the “Rio Declaration,” which called for the eradication of poverty throughout the world through the redistribution of wealth; the fourth document was the “Convention on Forest Principles,” calling for international management of the world’s forests, essentially shutting down or severely regulating the timber industry; and the fifth document was Agenda 21, which contained the full agenda for implementing worldwide Sustainable Development. The 300 page document contains 40 chapters that address virtually every facet of human life and contains great detail as to how the concept of Sustainable Development should be implemented through every level of government.

What did the United Nations believe that process entailed? In 1993, to help explain the far-reaching aspects of the plan, the UN published “Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet.” Here’s how the UN described Agenda 21 in that document: “Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of all people…Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced.” I have never read a stronger, more powerful description of the use of government power.

However, critics of our efforts against Agenda 21 rush to point out that Agenda 21 is a “soft law” policy – not a treaty that must be ratified by the U.S. Senate to become law. So it is just a suggestion, nothing to be afraid of. To make such an argument means that these critics have failed to follow the bouncing ball of implementation.

Following the bouncing ball to implementation

It started when, at the Earth Summit, President George H.W. Bush, along with 179 other heads of state signed agreement to Agenda 21. One year later, newly elected President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order # 12852 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). The Council consisted of 12 cabinet secretaries, top executives from business, and executives from six major environmental organizations, including the Nature Conservancy, The Sierra Club, the World Resources Institute, and the National Wildlife Federation. These were all players in the creation of Agenda 21 at the international level – now openly serving on the PCSD with the specific mission to implement Agenda 21 into American policy.

It is interesting to note that in the pages of the PCSD report entitled “Sustainable America: A new Consensus for the Future, it directly quotes the Brundtland Commission’s report “Our Common Future” for a definition of Sustainable Development. That is about as direct a tie to the UN as one can get. The PCSD brought the concept of Sustainable Development into the policy process of every agencies of the US federal government

A major tool for implementation was the enormous grant-making power of the federal government. Grant programs were created through literally every agency to entice states and local communities to accept Sustainable Development policy in local programs. In fact, the green groups serving on the PCSD, which also wrote Agenda 21 in the first place, knew full well what programs needed to be implemented to enforce Sustainable Development policy, and they helped create the grant programs, complete with specific actions that must be taken by communities to assure the money is properly spent to implement Sustainable Development policy. Those are the “strings” to which we opponents refer. Such tactics make the grants effective weapons to insure the policy is moving forward.

From that point, these same NGOs sent their members into the state legislatures to lobby for and encourage policy and additional state grant programs. They have lobbied for states to produce legislation requiring local communities to implement comprehensive development plans. Once that legislation was in place, the same NGOs (authors of Agenda 21) quickly moved into the local communities to “help” local governments comply with the state mandates. And they pledged to help by showing communities how to acquire the grant money to pay for it – with the above mentioned strings attached.

We’re told over and over again that such policies are local, state and national, with no conspiracy of ties to the UN. Really? Then how are we to explain this message, taken from the Federal Register, August 24, 1998, (Volume 63, Number 163) from a discussion on the EPA Sustainable Development Challenge Grant Program? It says, “The Sustainable Development Challenge Grant Program is also a step in Implementing ‘Agenda 21, the Global Plan of Action on Sustainable Development,’ signed by the United Stats at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. All of these programs require broad community participation to identify and address environmental issues.”

Or consider this quote from a report by Phil Janik, Chief Operating Officer of the USDA – Forest Service, entitled “The USDA-Forest Service Commitment and Approach to Forest Sustainability” “In Our Common Future published in 1987, the Brundtland Commission explains that ‘the environment is where we all live; and development is what we all do in attempting to improve our lot within that abode.” In short, Janik was explaining to his audience (the Society of American Foresters) just where the Forest Service was getting its definition of Sustainable Development – the report from the UN Commission on Global Governance.

Meanwhile, the NGOs began to “partner” with other governmental organizations like the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Governors Association, the National League of Cities, the National Association of County Administrators and more organizations to which elected representatives belong to, assuring a near that a near universal message of Sustainable Development comes from every level of government.  (Note from Marilyn:  These are the organizations that need to be checked out for membership in various UN organizations.)

Another NGO group which helped write Agenda 21 for the UN Earth Summit was a group originally called the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). It now calls itself ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability. After the Earth Summit in 1992, ICLEI set its mission to move into the policy process of local governments around the world to impose Sustainable Development policy. It now operates in more than 1200 cities globally, including 600 American cities, all of which pay dues for the privilege of working with ICLEI. Like a cancer, ICLEI begins to infest the local government policy, training city employees to think only in terms of Sustainable Development, and replacing local guidelines with international codes, rules and regulations.

So it’s true, there are no UN blue helmeted troops occupying city halls in America, and yes, the UN itself does not have enforcement capability for this “:non-binding” document called Agenda 21. However, it does have its own storm troopers in the person of the Non-governmental Organizations which the UN officially sanctions to carry on its work. And that is how Agenda 21, a UN policy, has become a direct threat to local American communities.

Why we oppose Agenda 21

It’s important to note that we fight Agenda 21 because we oppose its policies and its process, not just its origins. Why do we see it as a threat? Isn’t it just a plan to protect the environment and stop uncontrolled development and sprawl?

As Henry Lamb of Freedom 21 puts it, “Comprehensive land use planning that delivers sustainable development to local communities transforms both the process through which decisions that govern citizens are made, and the market place where citizens must earn their livelihood. The fundamental principle that government is empowered by the consent of the governed is completely by-passed in the process…the natural next step is for government to dictate the behavior of the people who own the land that the government controls.”

To enforce the policy, local government is being transformed by “stakeholder councils” created and enforced by the same NGO Agenda 21 authors. They are busy creating a matrix of non-elected boards, councils and regional governments that usurp the ability of citizens to have an impact on policy. It’s the demise of representative government. And the councils appear and grow almost overnight.

Sustainablists involve themselves in every aspect of society. Here are just a few of the programs and issues that can be found in the Agenda 21 blueprint and can be easily found in nearly every community’s “local” development plans: Wetlands, conservation easements, water sheds, view sheds, rails – to- trails, biosphere reserves, greenways, carbon footprints, partnerships, preservation, stakeholders, land use, environmental protection, development, diversity, visioning, open space, heritage areas and comprehensive planning. Every one of these programs leads to more government control, land grabs and restrictions on energy, water, and our own property. When we hear these terms we know that such policy originated on the pages of Agenda 21, regardless of the direct or indirect path it took to get to our community.

You’ll find Watershed Councils that regulate human action near every trickling stream, river, or lake. Meters are put on wells. Special “action” councils control home size, tree pruning, or removal, even the color you can paint your home or the height of your grass. Historic preservation councils control development in downtown areas, disallowing expansion and new building.

Regional governments are driven by NGOs and stakeholder councils with a few co-opted bureaucrats thrown in to look good. These are run by non-elected councils that don’t answer to the people. In short, elected officials become little more than a rubber stamp to provide official “approval” to the regional bureaucracy.

But the agenda outlined in Agenda 21 and by its proponents is a much bigger threat that just land use planning. They openly advocate massive reduction of human populations. Some actually call for as much as an 85% reduction in human populations in order to “save the planet.” David Brower of the Sierra Club said, “Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license.” The UN’s Biodiversity Assessment says, “A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be 1 billion.”

They also openly advocate the destruction of modern society as Maurice Strong, the head of the Earth Summit said, “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrial nations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?

This issue then is not about simple environmental protection and modern planning. It is about a complete restructuring of our society, our values and our way of life. They use as their model an urgency based on global warming and climate change, claiming there is no need for discussion on these dire issues. Yet science is showing more and more proof that there is no man-made global warming. Are we to completely destroy our society based on such a shaky foundation?

And that is just what the proponents are rushing to do.

Barack Obama has issued a flurry of Executive Orders to bypass the Congressional process and dictate sustainable policy. In 2011 Obama issued EO # 13575 creating the White House Rural Council. It brings together 25 Cabinet Secretaries to enforce multi-jurisdictional enforcement of farming virtually controlling every decision for food production. It is a major assault on American farm production intended to enforce Sustainable farming practices. In truth it will only lead to food shortages and higher prices as farmers have no ability to make a decision without the approval of 25 government agencies, working at cross purposes and causing chaos in farm production.

On May1, 2012, Obama issued EO # 13609, dictating that the government must enforce coordination of international regulatory policy. Those international regulatory policies are UN-driven and the basic translation means enforcement of Sustainable Development policy.

But, again, skeptics of our fears of Agenda 21 continue to argue that it is all voluntary and if the US or local governments want to enforce it they are free to do so – nothing to fear but ourselves. Well, even if that were true, that’s all about to change. On June 15 – 23, international forces are again converging on Rio for Rio+20. The stated intention is to complete the work they began in 1992.

Specifically called for is a UN treaty on Sustainable Development. If passed by the Senate and signed by the Obama Administration, that will eliminate any ambiguity about where the policy is coming from. Moreover, documents produced so far for the summit call for a global council, new UN agencies, budgets and powers, and “genuine global actions” in every nation – to ensure “social justice,” poverty eradication, climate protection, biodiversity, “green growth,” and an end to “unsustainable patterns of consumption.” Again, thousands of NGOs, diplomats and world leaders will spend a lot of money and time in the Rio+20 effort. Is it all just for fun, or does it have a purpose with strong consequences for our way of life?

The fact is, we fight Agenda 21 because it is all-encompassing, designed to address literally every aspect of our lives. This is so because those promoting Agenda 21 believe we must modify our behavior, our way of doing everyday things, and even our belief system, in order to drastically transform human society into being “sustainable.”

We who oppose it don’t believe that the world is in such dire emergency environmentally that we must destroy the very human civilization that brought us from a life of nothing but survival against the elements into a world that gave us homes, health care, food, and even luxury. Sustainable Development advocates literally hope to roll back our civilization to the days of mere survival and we say NO. Why should we? We have found great deception in the promotion of the global warming argument. We believe in free markets and free societies where people make their own decisions, live and develop their own property. And we fully believe that the true path to a strong protection of the environment is through private property ownership and limited government. Those who promote Agenda 21 do not believe in those ideals. And so we will not agree on the path to the future. And our fight is just that – a clash of philosophy. There is very little room for middle ground.

The United States has never been part of a global village in which rules for life have been handed down by some self-appointed village elders. We are a nation of laws that were designed to protect our right to our property and our individual life choices while keeping government reined in. We oppose Agenda 21 precisely because it represents the exact opposite view of government. For part one click below.

© 2012 Tom DeWeese – All Rights Reserved

Related Articles:

1- Agenda 21, the end of Western Civilization
2- Tea Party Candidate Warns of UN and Obama’s Agenda 21
3- U.N. Biospheres: A Scheme to Control People and Their Land


Tom DeWeese is one of the nation’s leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property rights, personal privacy, back-to-basics education and American sovereignty and independence.

A native of Ohio, he’s been a candidate for the Ohio Legislature, served as editor of two newspapers, and has owned several businesses since the age of 23. In 1989 Tom led the only privately-funded election-observation team to the Panamanian elections. In 2006 Tom was invited to Cambridge University to debate the issue of the United Nations before the Cambridge Union, a 200 year old debating society. Today he serves as Founder and President of the American Policy Center and editor of The DeWeese Report

For 40 years Tom DeWeese has been a businessman, grassroots activist, writer and publisher. As such, he has always advocated a firm belief in man’s need to keep moving forward while protecting our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

 Glaring Omissions

www.arkansasfreedom.com

By Joe and Barb McCutchen                                       joeusa@cox.net

A couple of weeks ago I paid for an ad in the Times Record pointing out the dangers of electing government employees to the state legislature.  Electing state employees increases the scope of government by allowing them to lobby for their own special interests while extirpating private citizens from the legislative process.  This of course is double-dipping, exploitation, and presents an alarming conflict of interests.

Secondly, I pointed out that “regionalism” is Communism.  Regionalism is not the pure form of Communism but a hybrid.  Regionalism is a mixture of Communism/Fascism.   The word Fascism conjures up visions of a swastika, Hitler, etc.  The simplified definition of Fascism is a nexus between corporations and government and the government is always the CEO.   This was the exact environment that brought Hitler to power and is precisely what is evolving in our republic­ commonly referred to as a “public/private partnership”.

Announced in a story emanating in the Times Record titled “City forecast not so grim, Chamber says”.  Fort Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce and CEO Paul Harvel revealed the formation of the Fort Smith Regional Council.   Note that the Council is unelected and as stated in my paid advertisement regionally unelected committees, czars, councils, task forces, etc. etc. destroy the sovereignty of counties, cities,  encroach on freedoms­ individual rights, property rights, & effectively mutes the power and influence of our duly elected officials who theoretically are supposed to represent the citizens.

The Times Record failed to mention the members of the Fort Smith Regional Council which includes ABF, USA Truck, UAFS, Oklahoma Gas Corp, OK Industries, Mercy Fort Smith, Kraft-Planters, Bancorp South, Arvest, Sparks, First National Bank, Baldor, & Stephens Production. A glaring omission by the T.R.  The Council’s inaugural president is Sam T. Sicard, president & CEO of First Bank Corp of Fort Smith. C of C president Harvel will be the Council Executive Director and continue as the Chamber’s president. Can one comprehend the political and monetary power the above represents and the channeling which will go into their own specific areas of interest? Does the middleclass have a place in this omnipotent power structure?  It does not appear so.
Here is the point of this screed; small businesses create 67% of the workforce in the U.S.  That’s 2 out of every 3 jobs, yet there does not appear to be one small business or an individual represented in the Fort Smith Regional Council.  Why is this? Equal representation does not seem to be the goal.  Certainly, our area is fortunate to have such corporations in our midst, but in a regional environment these types of businesses, if allowed to exclude small businesses and/or individuals; the middleclass has no representation and will be snuffed in the process. This is a huge power play by any definition.  The above corporations represent only 1/3rd of job producing businesses.

My paid advertisement was initially submitted to the Times Record as a letter to the editor, but yet again they chose not to publish, which is their prerogative, but media has the innate responsibility to report all sides.  I have indicated to the CEO of Stephens’ Inc.  Mr. Warren Stephens that censorship of legitimate topics is unseemly and inexcusable for newspapers. Stephens Inc. owns many, many newspapers including the Times Record.  Censorship excludes healthy exchanges, new ideas and of course, facts.

Joe McCutchen
www.arkansasfreedom.com


HISTORIC JUDGMENT: Bush and Associates, Found Guilty of Torture

05/20/2012

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30816

By Mathaba

The five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered a guilty verdict against former United States President George W. Bush and his associates at the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal hearing that had started on Monday, May 7th.

On the charge of Crime of Torture and War Crimes, the tribunal finds the accused persons former U.S. President George W. Bush and his associates namely Richard Cheney, former U.S. Vice President, Donald Rumsfeld, former Defence Secretary, Alberto Gonzales, then Counsel to President Bush, David Addington, then General Counsel to the Vice-President, William Haynes II, then General Counsel to Secretary of Defence, Jay Bybee, then Assistant Attorney General, and John Choon Yoo, former Deputy Assistant Attorney-General guilty as charged and convicted as war criminals for Torture and Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment of the Complainant War Crime Victims.

Earlier in the week, the tribunal heard the testimonies of three witnesses namely Abbas Abid, Moazzam Begg and Jameelah Hameedi. They related the horrific tortures they had faced during their incarceration. The tribunal also heard two other Statutory Declarations of Iraqi citizen Ali Shalal and Rhuhel Ahmed, a British citizen.

Testimony showed that Abbas Abid, a 48-year-old chief engineer in the Science and Technology Ministry had his fingernails removed by pliers. Ali Shalal was attached with bare electrical wires and electrocuted and hung from the wall. Moazzam Begg was beaten and put in solitary confinement. Jameelah was almost nude and humiliated, used as a human shield whilst being transported by helicopter. All these witnesses have residual injuries till today.

These witnesses were taken prisoners and held in prisons in Afghanistan (Bagram), in Iraq (Abu Gharib, Baghdad International Airport) and two of them namely Moazzam Begg and Rhuhel Ahmed were transported to Guantanamo Bay.

In a submission that lasted a day, the prosecution showed in an in depth submission how the decision-makers at the highest level President Bush, Vice-President Cheney, Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld, aided and abetted by the lawyers and the other commanders and CIA officials – all acted in concert. Torture was systematically applied and became an accepted norm.

According to the prosecution, the testimony of all the witnesses shows a sustained perpetration of brutal, barbaric, cruel and dehumanizing course of conduct against them. These acts of crimes were applied cumulatively to inflict the worst possible pain and suffering.

After hearing the defence of the Amicus Curiae and the subsequent rebuttal the prosecution, the tribunal ruled unanimously that there was a prima facie case made out by the prosecution.

After hours of deliberation, the tribunal, in the verdict that was read out by the president of the tribunal Tan Sri Dato Lamin bin Haji Mohd Yunus Lamin, found that the prosecution had established beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused persons, former President George Bush and his co-conspirators engaged in a web of instructions, memos, directives, legal advice and action that established a common plan and purpose, joint enterprise and/or conspiracy to commit the crimes of Torture and War Crimes, including and not limited to a common plan and purpose to commit the following crimes in relation to the “War on Terror” and the wars launched by the U.S. and others in Afghanistan and Iraq:
(a) Torture;
(b) Creating, authorizing and implementing a regime of Cruel, Inhumane, and Degrading Treatment;
(c) Violating Customary International Law;
(d) Violating the Convention Against Torture 1984;
(e) Violating the Geneva Convention III and IV 1949;
(f) Violating the Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention of 1949;
(g) Violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Charter.

The Tribunal finds that the prosecution has established beyond a reasonable doubt that the Accused persons are individually and jointly liable for all crimes committed in pursuit of their common plan and purpose under principles established by Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal (the Nuremberg Charter), which states, inter alia, “Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit war crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any person in execution of such plan.”

The Principles of the Nuremberg Charter and the Nuremberg Decision have been adopted as customary international law by the United Nations. The government of the United States is subject to customary international law and to the Principles of the Nuremburg Charter and the Nuremburg Decision.

The Tribunal finds that the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the accused lawyers, gave ‘advice’ that “the Geneva Conventions did not apply (to suspected al Qaeda and Taliban detainees); that there was no torture occurring within the meaning of the Torture Convention, and that enhanced interrogations techniques, (constituting cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment,) were permissible.”

The prosecution has also established beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused lawyers “knew full well their advice was being sought to be acted upon, and in fact was acted upon, and such advice paved the way for violations of international law, the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention.”

The accused lawyers’ advice was binding on the accused Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney, each of whom relied on the accused lawyers’ advice. Others, such as CIA Director George Tenet and Diane Beaver, officer in charge at Guantanamo, relied on the accused lawyers’ advice. The prosecution had established beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused lawyers are criminally liable for their acts, and for participating in a joint criminal enterprise.

The president read that the Tribunal orders that reparations commensurate with the irreparable harm and injury, pain and suffering undergone by the Complainant War Crime Victims be paid to the Complainant War Crime Victims. While it is constantly mindful of its stature as merely a tribunal of conscience with no real power of enforcement, the Tribunal finds that the witnesses in this case are entitled ex justitia to the payment of reparations by the 8 convicted persons and their government.

It is the Tribunal’s hope that armed with the findings of this Tribunal, the witnesses will, in the near future, find a state or an international judicial entity able and willing to exercise jurisdiction and to enforce the verdict of this Tribunal against the 8 convicted persons and their government. The Tribunal’s award of reparations shall be submitted to the War Crimes Commission to facilitate the determination and collection of reparations by the Complainant War Crime Victims.

President Lamin read, “As a tribunal of conscience, the Tribunal is fully aware that its verdict is merely declaratory in nature. The tribunal has no power of enforcement, no power to impose any custodial sentence on any one or more of the 8 convicted persons. What we can do, under Article 31 of Chapter VI of Part 2 of the Charter is to recommend to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission to submit this finding of conviction by the Tribunal, together with a record of these proceedings, to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as well as the United Nations and the Security Council.

The Tribunal also recommends to the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission that the names of all the 8 convicted persons be entered and included in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals and be publicized accordingly.

The Tribunal recommends to the War Crimes Commission to give the widest international publicity to this conviction and grant of reparations, as these are universal crimes for which there is a responsibility upon nations to institute prosecutions if any of these Accused persons may enter their jurisdictions.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Personally, I would like to apply some of the torture tactics on this scumbag and his replacement, so America would have more of the truth about 911, and the follow up acts that have destroyed freedom in America under the present tyrant. Burning at the stake is too good for these two scumbags.


GOLD COVER CLAUSE GUIDANCE

05/19/2012

Jim Willie CB

http://news.goldseek.com/GoldenJackass/1336593600.php

Jim Willie CB is the editor of the “HAT TRICK LETTER”

Use the above link to subscribe to the paid research reports, which include coverage of critically important factors at work during the ongoing panicky attempt to sustain an unsustainable system burdened by numerous imbalances aggravated by global village forces. An historically unprecedented mess has been created by compromised central bankers and inept economic advisors, whose interference has irreversibly altered and damaged the world financial system, urgently pushed after the removed anchor of money to gold. Analysis features Gold, Crude Oil, USDollar, Treasury bonds, and inter-market dynamics with the US Economy and US Federal Reserve monetary policy.

If today’s landscape was a war setting, it would feature collapsed buildings, rubble on the streets, empty warehouses, smoke spewing upward from numerous city heaps, and fire hoses sending water in every conceivable direction throughout the entire city. And sadly, also dead bodies littered everywhere. They serve as the economic damage. The city ruins are marred by additional water damage, rubber boots a necessity. The buildings can be seen as the crumbled sovereign bonds. The street rubble is the home equity destroyed, some still underwater. The shattered warehouses are businesses either wrecked or in fast retreat. The smoke is the painful emotions based in despair, loss, and absent opportunity. In stark display, the fire houses are the central banks printing and dispensing money from tainted sources, not from factory income but rather the vacuous Weimar press. Of key significance is the compounded damage inflicted by the water itself. ZIRP and QE are tandem weapons of mass destruction that have been at work toward business destruction and capital ruin of the USEconomy for three full years. The zero interest rate policy assures the wrong pricing of money, the capital fuel, thus distorting all markets. The quantitative easing is based in extreme desperation, as the USGovt has lost the majority (80%) of its foreign creditor support.

The celebrated bond monetization assures the steady rise in cost structure which forces a vanishing of business profitability. The nation was taught improperly in pure heresy from USFed high priests that the free flowing liquidity was good, as the housing market expanded (bubble #1) alongside mortgage finance (bubble #2).

The public was told incorrectly in 2007 that the damage would be limited. The Jackass forecasted absolute bond contagion and destruction, which has come to pass in shocking style. The sovereign bond collapse in Europe, where the USDollar printing must be conducted through the swap facility conduit, is evidence of the absolute destruction. Witness the collapse of the global fiat monetary system. The supposed solution from evermore central bank monetary creation has compounded the problem by adding to capital ruin. No solution within the current monetary framework is possible, thus the demand for gold. Impairment has moved from the margin to the core from water damage. Central banks, big corporate bankers, and finance ministry heads have no clue what to do and have begun to display their panic. They are out of options.

Conditions for gold investment and price rise could not be more perfect in the current environment. The infusion of fresh money without basis has led to historically unprecedented monetary debasement. The ruin of money is well along, certain to continue in greater amplified manner. The solutions based in debt gauze and debt ointment cannot cure the indebted patient suffering from debt breakdown and bankruptcy. Central bankers, looked to for leadership, have no clue what to do. They turn repeatedly to a broken first aid kit. The United States has seen over $3 trillion in new money shoved into the system in the last couple years. The European landscape has been overwhelmed by over $3 trillion just in the last several months. Yet no remedy is remotely visible, the new consensus. France has taken on the popular virus, calling for socialism in stronger dosage, to help the people. Spain is emboldened on the socialist theme, having given clear signals in rejecting austerity also. Italy could soon be worse infected, as unelected castle appointee Mario Monti must worry about being tossed off a balcony. The Greece showcase of failed solutions is visible to all, hardly the path other larger nations wish to follow. But the Greeks had no legs, no courage, and no guts to resist. Their leaders bent over at every request. Iceland stands as the workable model, whose solution rested on nationalizing the banks and repudiating debt held by banks.

The smell of monetary ruin is everywhere, as investment houses and private investments struggle to determine what money is anymore. It surely is not the fiat paper coerced as legal tender that is backed by debt and not output. However, in this perfect situation for gold investment, the main thrust powerpack is negative real rates. The prevailing ultra-low official interest rate is far below the reality-based prevailing price inflation rate. Even the 2% yield on the 10-year USTreasury is far below the true price inflation, whose annual rate is measured between 9% and 11% for several months by the unerring Shadow Govt Statistics craftsmen.

PROPAGANDA PUSH
The mainstream has chosen to trot out some supposed experts among the elite business class. The banker class has been discredited. The Wall Street lieutenants appear more like mafia dons, smirking with Cheshire grins over unprosecuted $trillion fraud committed in serial fashion. So from Berkshire Hathaway came Charlie Munger to denigrate gold. He does not look like he misses any meals, nor has Warren Buffet’s portly son. Neither have any gold credentials whatsoever, unable to recite even the basics of the market or its chief driving factors. Munger stated (as though an authority) that gold was not an investment for the civilized. Oracle Warren Buffet sold silver early, so he claims, back in 2003. What a grand lie! He followed Hank Greenberg’s lead and created an income stream in selling option calls. The practice made Warren a liar, since he constantly proclaimed precious metals offered no income. When Warren’s 129 million silver ounce hoard was called away in an option settlement, the Barclays gang took it and started the corrupt SLV exchange traded fund. Later it was sold to JPMorgan, where it has been corruptly managed ever since, to keep America strong. Their stock & trade is naked shorting of the metal, selling paper futures contracts with no posted collateral. Heck, on February 29th, they sold more paper silver in one hour than was produced by mining firms globally in a full year. The wonders of financial engineering by the New York & London crowd are glaring, the pus for which is visible from MFGlobal account thefts.

In the same manner, Bill Gates of Microsoft fame was trotted out. He had fewer words of wisdom to share on gold, except that it was speculative. Neither Munger nor Gates seems aware that the flow of financial crisis events and their aftermath reflect not in any way shape or form on civilized nations. Neither Munger nor Gates seems aware that investment in protection is highly prudent and justified against inflated asset breakdown, against debt saturation implications, against secretive elite cornering of official aid, against bailouts with new debt to cover old debt, against sovereign bond crumbling, against absent economic stimulus with meaning, against systemic capital ruin, against chronic job loss. But the Jackass digresses, certain to be called extreme and wild until the next dire forecast comes to pass in a long sequence of correct calls. To be honest, my forecast record has taken a nice turn toward the rosy and charmed ever since taking Rob Kirby’s advice not to forecast long-term US interest rates anymore. He called the USTreasury Bond market the most corrupted interfered controlled and mangled of any market in the world. That was back in 2009. How true! See the Interest Rate Swap for long-term rate management. See the USFed for its chief buyer of USTreasury Bonds in a balance sheet wrecked as badly as the European Central Bank, both badly and irreparably toxic. They preside over monetary wreckage and banking system ruin.

The gold cartel has used a favorite piece of propaganda since 2003 when the bull market began in earnest. The claim has been regularly made that the gold bull is tired and exhausted since jewelry demand has fallen off. Any student of gold can tell you that tapered jewelry demand is solid confirmation of the gold bull market. It serves as an extremely reliable gold contrary indicator. It is easy to explain. People buy fewer necklaces, bracelets, and other valued objects, since they cost more in a noticeable manner. Some turn to selling old unwanted jewelry, especially if a reminder of a lost love interest. In its place comes a torrent of investment demand, where not $300 is spent on a piece for a lovely neck, but rather $30 thousand or $3 million in gold or silver bars. Investment volume is at least an order of magnitude greater than for jewelry. The motive for jewelry is often discretionary in the West, but a method for the lower and middle class to save in the East. The gold cartel trots out the idiotic vacant propaganda about sagging jewelry demand every four to six months, in order to fool the stupid masses. It works for some, especially those with lazy herd mentality research and with inadequate brain stems. To be sure, sluggish jewelry demand is a very reliable contrary signal to confirm a gold bull market, always has been, always will.

A sidebar note on Microsoft. When Gates was faced with anti-trust violations and potential breakup in 2004 and 2005, which would have been justice meted, he argued that the firm was a colossus to be sure, but was successful in innovation and needed to remain intact. Ever since reading the unauthorized biography entitled “Hard Drive” back in 1992, my trails have followed the Microsoft path closely. Their marketing innovation was sequential date rape, inviting the next generation for product development, hiding the systems software guys with swapped business cards, offering up a few $million to ambitious fools, then pulling the plug after the fools showed their trade secrets and copyrighted software (lifted their skirts, in the trade parlance). Months later, Microsoft would produce a competitor product, with the advantage of making the hooks efficiently tied to the operating system, but with broken hooks for the competitor products. So much for product innovation, Mr Gates. Their innovation was evident in the crappy products released for database management, like MS Access which is denigrated by every database expert the Jackass ever talked to. Oracle DB is for professionals, and MS Access for amateurs lacking standards of excellence who are required to use it.

The list of such violated companies is as long as a page, led by Ashton Tate, Micrografx, and Stac Electronics. In fact, the Jackass had a nice investment in Stac (CLICK HERE for background). Note the complete lie about talks for licensing, as intimidating requests for donation and zero compensation does not constitute as talks for licensing at all. Stac Electronics produced a software product that virtually doubled the disk drive capacity in the 1990 decade, long before 40gb was a standard hard drive, and compression was made obsolete. Recalled well were the words of my stock broker, who urged me never to bet against Microsoft, or Big Mo as he called it. He said any investor betting on the first successful infringement lawsuit against Microsoft was a surefire loser. Not!!! What the Jackass bought in Stac stock at $1.50 per share was sold at $4 to $5 per share about one year later after Stac won a lawsuit for theft of product, the first against Big Mo. To be sure, the Jackass did not have any great string of investment wins, but some.

Later, the MS Windows product development was unveiled further in ugly public glory. What a travesty in poor software development, totally lacking innovation, a glaring display of shabby software! They stomped on Netscape after severe intimidation, after they refused to donate to the MS Monopoly Kingdom. As it turned out, Microsoft bought the also-ran anti-virus software McAfee after Norton told them to get lost. They essentially appealed to the third best in an assortment of system software utilities, requesting them to donate their software for free, join immortality, and live on. The best and second best obviously refused. The third best were flattered and accepted, having no viable option in a tough marketplace. MS Windows continues to have substandard virus protection. Their defragmentation software is also substandard. Their breakdown recovery software is also substandard. So as for claims to excellence, Mr Gates is a laughing stock. His comments on gold were as deep as a 12-year old child’s. Digress no more.

GOLD COVER CLAUSE
A gold cover clause for new viable strong currencies is an idea whose time has urgently come. Consider another often used piece of propaganda that actually exposes the desperation of the gold cartel, and the assumed ignorance of the public once more. The concept goes like this: The gold supply is so limited, so that it could not possibly qualify as a hard asset backing for the money within the global monetary system. How totally wrong! How incredibly shallow! What they do is expose their own greatest vulnerability. Back in 1971, when the Bretton Woods Accord was broken, the gold price was officially set by force at absurd level, like under $40 per ounce. It quickly zoomed in the next decade to $800 in a relief exercise much like a jailbreak of a bunch of anxious men bent on seeking fun after restricted times.

Over the last 30 years, the growth in the money supply has been unspeakable in its huge volume. It could be several tens of $trillions just in official data for only the major nations. It could be well in excess of $100 trillion over the years, after excluding the derivative volumes. The monetary growth is like umpteen multiples over the timespan. Normally, the gradual growth in monetary aggregate would be accompanied by gradual new gold output to match it. The fiat currency system has permitted the expansion of social system networks. It has permitted the series of asset bubbles and busts, a cyclical phenomenon blessed as good by the clownish central bankers. It has permitted unchecked war aggression, complete with private profiteer motive. It has permitted magnificent bond fraud and counterfeit of both bonds and cash, the chief $100 bill violations coming from Langley and Tehran. Just last 2007, the USDept Treasury complained about missing $100 bill templates, a firm finger pointed at Langley, where independent income sources have long been desired and achieved. See the narcotics monopoly they command, with major platforms in Cambodia, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan over the decades. So the false argument of adequate gold supply is trumpeted, but in ignorance as they reveal the very reason why gold should be priced at multiples higher. If the expanded monetary aggregate (money supply) were to be properly reflected in the price of gold, its price per ounce would be somewhere between $10,000 and $15,000 easily. So the hack argument is put forth on occasion. The rebuttal is that the torrid growth of new money without basis would justify a gold price almost ten times higher, at which point the shortage of gold would not be so acute.

In fact, the gold cover clause would then enter the equation. Note first a quick reference to the fractional concept. The gold cartel enjoys its fractional reserve policy that extends to bank lending and even the illicit gold bullion management. The central banks, sometimes with Congressional input, choose to dictate lending reserves within the entire banking system. In general, 10 to 20 times as much money is lent to borrowers as is held in bank reserves. It is called the fractional banking system. Pain comes only when economies go into reverse, as banks fail like flies caught in window sills during summer heat spells. The gold cartel illicitly extended the fractional practice to their gold management scheme. Investors typically place their gold bullion in the custody of the big banks, which assign Allocated accounts (metal bars identified with specific owners) or Unallocated accounts (cumulative metal pooled with owners of redeemable certificates). Unbeknownst to many supposed allocated account holders, their gold bullion metal is gone, treated to pooling improperly. This is precisely the basis of several multi-$billion lawsuits in Switzerland. The financial press prefers to genuflect and not mention the story to the public, for fear of alarming the investment community into a veritable stampede. The Swiss violations were tipped off to the Jackass in the summer 2010, having escalated into a national crisis but of hidden proportions.

The global monetary system could be backed by gold, but in a cover clause whereby each participating nation would declare a given percentage of gold for redemption upon demand. For instance, the entire world could do very well to create a stable financial platform and foundation for the monetary system with a 5% gold cover clause. If someone holds $100,000 in cash in whatever country, then the holder could demand $5000 in gold bars. A financial firm with $100 million in cash could demand $5 million in gold bars. The stability of the system would be made strong. The argument of inadequate gold supply would be alleviated during a rendered 20-fold increase in the money stock. Consider the workable 5% cover clause. Furthermore, in times of crisis replete with extensions to the scourge of steady USGovt $1.5 trillion deficits, and multi-$trillion Wall Street fraud, and endless $trillion Western Europe bond bailouts, the gold cover clause could be increased to 10%. In more stable times, the gold cover clause could be reduced back to 5% and even lowered to 3%.

COMPETING NEW CURRENCYS
The flexibility of a gold cover clause device could enable a few competing currencies. They would float, but the linkage to gold would prevent much fluctuation beyond recognized bands. If the Russian Ruble were backed by a 2% cover clause, then that currency could float but drift lower in value. If a Chinese Yuan were backed by an 8% cover clause, then it could float with a higher drifted bias. If a new Euro Mark currency were backed by a 5% cover clause, then it could float with an even keel. The kicker could be the Gulf Dinar, which might be required for purchasing crude oil. The varying cover clause could act in the future monetary system backed by gold as a flexible system where the major nations could alter their percentage in gold cover redemption in much the same way they do nowadays with official interest rates. The many major central banks could actually manage the gold supply in a responsible manner, resorting to mundane duties like counting money and acquiring more gold, rather than the present function where they oversee reckless monetary expansion, control currency debasement, coordinate bond fraud, dispense gigantic grants to the elite caste of banks, and conceal narcotics money laundering.

See the March and April Hat Trick Letter reports for a continued discussion of a potential four currency system, all backed to some extent by gold. An extremely important point on new currency offerings. The opportunity for a second nation to launch a new hard asset currency is ripe when the first is announced. There is strength in numbers when it comes to new currencies, seeking the greatest critical mass. The odd men out would be the USDollar and the British Pound, possibly the Swiss Franc. No doubt in my mind that Japan would sign on with China to create a powerful and solid foundation for Asia. The US and UK would be forced to compete with at least three new strong kids on the FOREX block. The argument sometimes heard is that the Euro cannot break up, the Germans cannot start a viable new Nordic Euro currency, since the new currency entry would be a sudden victim of its own success. As it showed its strong foundation underpinnings, its exchange rate would rise and rise, enough to put the German export industry at great risk. True! But true only if the new Nordic Euro (or Euro Mark) is the odd man out.

Supposing four new currencies were launched, all hard asset currencies, in which the majority of global trade was settled, then the argument has big holes since the existing system would suddenly find itself outside looking in. That is precisely what is in progress of occurring in a system overhaul outside the US-UK sphere, after mammoth planning and execution in the background, with Finnish assistance and big commitments from Russia and China, the lead coordinator being Germany. The key is to produce a new system quickly and responsibly, in a manner with strength and vitality, that does not depend upon faith so much as substance. The Western leaders, principally US, UK, and Switzerland, have amply demonstrated that they prefer fraud and theft to leadership and integrity.

EUROPEAN LIGHTNING HITS
Prepare for a simultaneous currency launch that will shake the Western power structure to the core and cause financial tsunamis from the grand tremors. The trigger could very likely be the sudden collapse of key nations like France, Spain, and Italy together as they reject austerity and push the bond market past the limits. In my view the fuse has been lit. Their banking systems and bond structures cannot withstand any more shock. The popular votes cast against austerity and the present course could instead be regarded as a clear toilet plunger pull, much like a popular uprising. The consensus want no more elite banker bailouts and harsh neglect of the people. The upcoming Eastern SWIFT bank transaction system is almost ready for prime time, its development in progress. The Chinese will take the lead position, taking the flack, pushing the process, which will not resemble the current SWIFT system in the flow vehicle. The transition of political power in Beijing makes the timing perfect. The Iran sanctions served to galvanize the anti-USDollar movement. One source involved in the barter system design, at the fringe of the new SWIFT system, reported that the Iran sanctions did them a great favor, by bringing several newer nations to the planning room for integration in the new global trade transaction system. DO NOT BE SURPRISED TO HEAR IT HAS A GOLD FEATURE TO HANDLE THE TRADE.

Rumors to the effect that the Chinese want to implement a gold backed trade settlement system outside the USDollar, have been confirmed by my great reliable indefatigable source.

France will trigger the disruption process. Higher deficits are coming, also to Spain. Both nations reject the austerity built into budgets that clearly does not work. The next major challenge is to finance government debt. Watch for higher bond yields on sovereign debt, the signal for breakdown. The big new wrinkle is widespread rejection of austerity budgets. The major victims will be the big banks, which in my opinion will begin to topple quickly, and require bailouts, even a full recapitalization overhaul, more fuel for the gold bull. Already talk is loud in France over the potential failure of Credit Agricole. The big bank could imminently fail. Its failure seems an easier foreseen event than Lehman Brothers. The bond markets will resist with fierce stubbornness any easy financing of expanding government deficits. The bond traders are typically smart. They expect much larger deficits immediately. They can see that the economies in recession will make for a nearly impossible payback in debt, with certain larger deficits to follow. Expect even grander central bank bond monetization as the process accelerates. The truly stupid debate over QE3 is mind numbing in its empty thought. The Quantitative Easing never stopped. What fools to debate! Like arguing over a possible nasty rain session during an actual thunderstorm. The QE will become a widely publicly recognized phenomenon. The impact will be felt in gold demand, during an orchestra of monetary devaluations. Once again, another major wild card is the bank system recapitalization, whose needs would be several $trillion. It will made more urgent by the new wave of socialists in power, namely in France and Spain. During all this, the stifling MFGlobal effect has removed many legitimate players from the COMEX. It will become an irrelevance, an empty stadium. Perhaps the new Asian exchanges will thwart the Western influence (Rock & Roth gangsters) and take up the slack to produce an honest risk hedge market with price discovery brokering. The disintegration of COMEX, and deterioration of USEconomy will be events for the ages. They already are.

GOLD READIES FOR STORM
My firm belief is that a fair equitable gold price will come only after the price goes dark in the normal traditional paper dominated channels. For over a month, the gold market has been operating like within the eye of a hurricane. At work is a new promising dynamic that most in the gold community seem totally unaware of, without solid sourced information. Repeatedly, my gold trader source, who has numerous billionaire clients on three continents, informs that truly gigantic buy orders are sitting between 1600 and 1680, spaced by 10 dollars apart, having greater volume with each lower notched price in an inverted pyramid. The Eastern Coalition is angry and motivated, fitted with well over $50 billion in a war chest, determined to wreck the New York and London bankers and remove them from their corrupt perch. Gigantic buy orders are being filled, the victims being gold cartel member banks themselves. They are highly vulnerable. They are strapped for cash, confirmed by a separate source. They face margin calls on sovereign bonds of Europe, compounded by some bad FOREX positions. To extract themselves from the pinch of the margin calls, the cartel banks are being forced to sell out their precious metals bullion held in reserve, in order to obtain desperately needed cash. This is a new phenomenon, not seen a year ago, in a total reversal used against them, since in the past, the cartel used the same methods against client hedge funds.

THE GOLD PRICE WILL RISE ONLY WHEN THE EASTERN DEEP POCKETS DECIDE THEY ARE CONTENT WITH THE MASSIVE GOLD RAIDS ON CARTEL GOLD RESERVES, ONLY WHEN ENORMOUS VOLUMES OF ORDERS ARE FILLED AT LOW PRICES, THUS DRAINING CARTEL MEMBER BANKS.

The gold price will not rise until the Eastern Coalition has had their fill in a Western diet rich in gold on this round of the Groundhog Day cycle. The last cycle ended in mid-January. This round lasted longer, and involved much more gold taken from the cartel banks. They are badly and soon mortally wounded. Witness the unraveling of abused leverage by the cartel banks. In the process of de-leveraging, the cartel is losing their gold bullion. They are vulnerable, made worse by their insolvency, aggravated by their lack of liquidity. The paper gold price is imploding, but not the physical price. The divergence between paper and physical gold markets is proceeding exactly as previewed a few months ago. It is hard to see, because the great majority of gold investors do not have access to details on $billion gold orders being filled, who is supplying the gold, who is demanding the gold, and the conditions relating to margin calls, complete with motivated vengeance to deliver death blows in a global power struggle. Most people cannot contact their favorite friendly gold trader with a Rolodex of ten-figure clientele and request the latest battle won against a targeted bank. History is being made, but behind big broad curtains.

Unfortunately, the Eastern gold raids waged against the Western gold cartel might be satisfied with gold bullion pulled from the back door of the GLD exchange traded fund. As the Eastern Coalition observes the de-leverage process and swoops to exploit the insolvent condition compounded by lack of liquidity, the demands made on cartel member gold reserves might come from the GLD fund itself. The cartel simply shorts the GLD stock, entitling themselves to vast truckloads of GLD gold bars in illicit grabs. The tracks are covered by altered bar lists, whose track record is so abysmal and faulty that new covered tracks are easily made. The GLD fund is destined for a day like Madoff and Corzine before the Congress, but with far more lawsuits. Given the vast conduits between Europe and the United States, any event triggered on the continent will extend quickly to the US and UK.

The first victim was UBS, stripped of their gold last summer. A hint was given that the next victim might be Deutsche Bank. My other guess is a London player like Barclays is being stripped of its gold, or a big US bank turned timid after the MFGlobal attention. Major players are falling victim to the global financial crisis, better described as the global monetary war in which the USDollar and its USTreasury trading vehicle are the weapons of mass destruction. The race is on to replace them. The Chinese and their allies are the Team East in charge of overturning the current power structure dominated by gold story propaganda, mortgage bond fraud, hidden USTBond monetization, diverse market interference, private account theft, chronic naked futures shorting, controlled regulator puppets, rifled allocated gold accounts, salted gold bars, expansive derivative schemes, abuse of leverage, and numerous $trillion role programs conducted by the USDept Treasury and the Bank of England.

The new monetary platform will have many aspects, such as a vertically structured barter system, a handful of hard asset currencies, and potentially an element of gold in trade settlement. The role of gold in trade settlement is taking shape, a movement which will turn the USDollar into a widely discarded toxic paper, a ticket to the Third World. These are exciting times, if one can avoid the traps and pitfalls, including hooligans bearing USGovt badges offered bounty working against enemies of the state (without definition).

THE HAT TRICK LETTER PROFITS IN THE CURRENT CRISIS.

From subscribers and readers:
At least 30 recently on correct forecasts regarding the bailout parade, numerous nationalization deals such as for Fannie Mae and the grand Mortgage Rescue.

“In my 40 plus years of business experience that includes stints in public and private companies as well as entrepreneurial ventures, I have read numerous newsletters in an effort to stay abreast of a rapidly changing world. In my opinion, you seem to be tying the pieces together better than any other source.”
(BobT in Maine)
“Your monthly reports are at the top of my list for importance, nothing else coming close. You are the one resource I can NOT do without! You have helped me and countless others to successfully navigate the most treacherous times one can possibly imagine. Making life altering decisions during tough times means you must have all the information available with direct bearing on the decision. Jim Willie gives you ALL the needed information, a highly critical difference. You cant afford to be wrong in today’s world.”
(BrentT in North Carolina)
“You have warned over and over since Fall of 2009 that Europe would come apart and it sure looks like exactly that is happening. You have warned continually about the COMEX and now the entire CME seems to be unraveling. You must receive a lot of criticism regarding your analysis, trashing the man, without debate. Your work is appreciated. I do not care how politically incorrect or how impolite your style is. What is happening to our economy and financial system is neither politically correct or polite.”
(DanC in Washington)
“The best money I spend. Your service is the biggest bang for the buck.”
(DaveJ in Michigan)

Jim Willie CB is a statistical analyst in marketing research and retail forecasting. He holds a PhD in Statistics. His career has stretched over 25 years. He aspires to thrive in the financial editor world, unencumbered by the limitations of economic credentials. Visit his free website to find articles from topflight authors at www.GoldenJackass.com . For personal questions about subscriptions, contact him at JimWillieCB@aol.com


CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND AGENDA 21

05/18/2012

http://www.newswithviews.com/fredinburg/fredinburg144.htm

By Roger Fredinburg

May 18, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Lets put the monsters behind bars

The Anti-Human environmental movement is inundated with un-American Ideals and they are a far more dangerous threat to our safety and well being than any of the other radical terror groups on earth.

The plotting and planning, the hidden agendas and the penetration into our government and media at every level, is easily the most successful infiltration of communitarian and communist agents inside the US media and our government ever.

Their ultimate goal? Total annihilation of the US and Global population to 15% of current levels, and I can prove that from their own training documents. Even Adolph Hitler wasn’t that committed.

They do it through programs like Agenda 21, a UN sanctioned global initiative designed to place infil-TRAITORS [spelling intentional] inside key US Government agencies at every level, local to national, for the sole purpose of stealing the most valuable asset any American has, our individual freedom and liberty.

The champions of this Globalist criminal conspiracy use those same infil-TRAITORS to bind together as a collateral political force to coerce and intimidate any detractors, and to physically and financially support candidates to elective offices to do their bidding. These criminal conspirators are helping to ruin America and destroy the nation by separating the people from their source of power; the US Constitution, one stupid rule at a time.

The dumbed down brainwashed masses in America today, mostly have a low work ethic and see no fault in robbing their fellow Americans through senseless regulations, taxes and moronic policies. These leaches on society are happy to comply with these anti-human, anti-American infil-TRAITORS for a hand full of food stamps, a rent voucher and a medical marijuana card.

The solution is obvious to me. It is to gather the last few remaining patriots together in a do or die effort to pool financial resources and to demand criminal charges. We must find a way to fund civil lawsuits against these rotten people and use media to push for criminal charges. These folks are empowered by their useless government or media positions to quietly bring about the collapse of this nation. Like a Trojan horse, they are the enemies within and they are succeeding.

The most important thing to remember in my view is this fact; EVERY one of these folks in the bureaucracy, appointed, elected or hired took an oath of office that requires them to “defend” the US Constitution. Can they really claim that they are doing that?

We can easily prove that they meet in secret to plot and conspire about how best to rob us of our money, life force, inalienable rights and our future. And a criminal conspiracy to over-throw the United States of America by fiat, as best as I can tell, under the rules of the Patriot act is an act of terrorism.

One of the primary material losses we have suffered as individuals, and as a group, is that of the American dream. There is no way to put a dollar value on that. We can prove that it’s been damaged beyond repair by these treacherous un-American people who pushed extreme land use planning laws, and forced anti-traditional family values regulations, robbing families of their sovereignty. These over-paid charlatans have even put animal rights over human rights and indebted the next 100 generations of un-born Americans. That is involuntary servitude where I live. This nonsense has developed into the most egregious Human Rights assault in American history. We need a new civil rights movement now, and I am asking you to be part of it.

Criminal conspiracy is defined as an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime or to perpetrate an illegal act. Conspiracy crimes that are federal can include conspiracy to engage in criminal activity such as conspiracy to violate federal laws. [and I think Oaths of Office] Conspiracy charges in state court are very similar, but there are many more crimes that will give rise to state conspiracy charges. While intent is key in any federal conspiracy case, only “general intent” to violate the law is necessary; proof of the defendants’ specific intent to violate the law is not needed, only an agreement to engage in an illegal act. The end may be legal, but the planned means are illegal. For example, two persons making a plan to “take” another person’s property (illegal) to donate to another undeserving person (legal) would be guilty of conspiracy.

U.S.C. Title 18, Chapter 19 prohibits conspiracies to defraud the United States, conspiracies to impede or injure an officer, and conspiracies to commit violent crimes. However, conspiracy is prohibited in several other federal statutes. It is important to note that an actual crime is not necessary to prosecute a conspiracy case – only the stated intent to break the law. [So, I contend that a conspiracy to break your oath as a group might qualify] This means that even if the ultimate crime was not committed, the conspirators can be prosecuted under federal law.

However, most states have laws that prevent conspiracy charges to be pressed if no actions were taken to actually carry out the conspiracy. This prevents people from effectively being prosecuted for having thoughts of breaking the law. While this caveat does prevent some conspiracy cases from going to court, it does not reduce the severity of a criminal conspiracy claim. In many cases, conspiracy to commit a crime such as murder is regarded as a crime as severe as murder itself.

The federal maximum penalty for criminal conspiracy is five years in prison; however, this may be compounded by other state and federal violations. Depending on the nature of the conspiracy, it may be prosecuted by different entities including the FBI, Department of Justice, or state and local law agencies.

So here is your challenge…

I want to know if there are any lawyers out there, maybe semi-retired, who love America enough to help us form a legal battle line and who will assist in restoring our freedom, and help us prosecute and jail these criminals?

And, is anyone retired or semi-retired who can donate their time and is so equipped with a skill set to manage the effort?

Finally, is there anyone who agrees and is willing to help?

God Bless!

© 2012 Roger Fredinburg – All Rights Reserved


Roger Fredinburg is a national radio figure. He conducted a daily 3 hour syndicated radio talk show heard in hundreds of cities from coast to coast. He was syndicated by Talk Radio Network along side Art Bell and held on to more that 150 radio stations from 1993 until he left Radio America in 2004. He now owns an ad agency;www.hohumproductions.com and offers audio and video blogging at www.regularguy.com

E-mail   radioroger@aol.com

 


Brodsky and Quaintance Central banks aim to redistribute gold and push it way up

05/16/2012

Submitted by cpowell on 03:29PM ET Tuesday, May 15, 2012. Section: Daily Dispatches
6:26p ET Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Dear Friend of GATA and Gold:

In their May letter, Paul Brodsky and Lee Quaintance of QB Asset Management in New York argue that the investment case for gold is to a great extent a matter of its likely official revaluation upward to support confidence-based currencies that have lost the market’s confidence.

As improbable as it may seem lately, what with the constant suppression of gold and silver prices on the futures markets, Brodsky and Quaintance conclude that central banks now really mean to push the gold price up — way up — once the gold necessary for the plan has been obtained and redistributed among central banks. Brodsky and Quaintance write:

“The key to a successful transition is a credible monetary reset. Gold is the default collateral for money because it has a long and established precedent in this role. All that would be needed would be a fairly equitable distribution of gold among global monetary authorities (taking place now?), and an agreed-upon exchange rate vis-a-vis baseless paper. It would have to be an exchange rate at which central banks could successfully monetize assets by tendering for physical gold with newly manufactured paper money, an exchange rate high enough to attract enough gold to cover unreserved credit held in the banking system. It’s a high figure.

“The relative cost of holding physical gold today is minimal, (above-ground bullion or in-ground bullion through mining shares), against the negative real returns offered by the preponderance of financial assets in float. We suggest one keep identities straight; invest with central banks, not against them; and consider the hollow rhetoric of the establishment that may temporarily suppress its paper price a ‘gift.’ They are working for physical gold holders, not against them.”

Brodsky and Quaintance have kindly allowed GATA to post their letter here:

http://www.gata.org/files/QBAMCO-May2012.pdf

CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

This looks like a last ditch effort to justify a massive new supply of fiat dollars, and my concern is, what will they do to the price of gold once they have stabilized the  currency? Be ready for anything, be liquid as possible. They will never give up in their effort to justify a one world currency, and they are a hell of a lot smarter than we are.


Obama has signed 3 new executive orders:

05/15/2012

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2012/05/15/obama-has-signed-3-new-executive-orders/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/executive-order-promoting-international-regulatory-cooperation

and

www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/10/executive-order-identifying-and-reducing-regulatory-burdens

and

www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/15/executive-order-establishing-white-house-council-strong-cities-strong-co

This latest executive order will allow the soviet socialists in our local communities through their committees to adopt and enact United Nations regulations designed to establish absolute United Nations’ control over our every resource. The laws of the United States, individual states, counties, cities, and local municipalities, under our Constitution must be legislated. These executive orders bypass the legislative process and essentially nullify our representative form of government under the guise of allowing us to voice our opinion in reference to new regulation rather than enforce our will through elected representation. If one examines these three executive orders closely, Obama’s agenda becomes clear. The international socialists, known as the United Nations, are worming their way into our political system at every level. Through the local socialist committees that will be assembled, local commissars will be elected.

These commissars, working in coalition with state and local agencies and sovereign nations/Indian Tribes, will attempt to initiate UN dictatorship over our lands, both private and public. And through regulation of the land, they will attempt to establish dictatorial control over the actions of we the people.

 

This is a sneak attack and it will not be publicized in the mainstream media. You will know these words are true when you see the soviet socialists in your area seizing control over your public and private lands using regulatory powers derived directly from the United Nations Agenda 21.

www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/executive-order-promoting-international-regula

http://www.whitehouse.gov

EXECUTIVE ORDER
– – – – – – –
PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY COOPERATION

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to promote international regulatory cooperation, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Note! The Constitution does not give him this authority! HE IS A LIAR!

Section 1. Policy. Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), states that our regulatory system must protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation. In an increasingly global economy, international regulatory cooperation, consistent with domestic law and prerogatives and U.S. trade policy, can be an important means of promoting the goals of Executive Order 13563.

The regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may differ from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address similar issues. In some cases, the differences between the regulatory approaches of U.S. agencies and those of their foreign counterparts might not be necessary and might impair the ability of American businesses to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.

Sec. 2. Coordination of International Regulatory Cooperation. (a) The Regulatory Working Group (Working Group) established by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), which was reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563, shall, as appropriate:
(i) serve as a forum to discuss, coordinate, and develop a common understanding among agencies of U.S. Government positions and priorities with respect to:
(A) international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulatory actions;
(B) efforts across the Federal Government to support significant, cross-cutting international regulatory cooperation activities, such as the work of regulatory cooperation councils; and

(C) the promotion of good regulatory practices internationally, as well as the promotion of U.S. regulatory approaches, as appropriate; and

(ii) examine, among other things:

(A) appropriate strategies for engaging in the development of regulatory approaches through international regulatory cooperation, particularly in emerging technology areas, when consistent with section 1 of this order;

(B) best practices for international regulatory cooperation with respect to regulatory development, and, where appropriate, information exchange and other regulatory tools; and

(C) factors that agencies should take into account when determining whether and how to consider other regulatory approaches under section 3(d) of this order.

(b) As Chair of the Working Group, the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) shall convene the Working Group as necessary to discuss international regulatory cooperation issues as described above, and the Working Group shall include a representative from the Office of the United States Trade Representative and, as appropriate, representatives from other agencies and offices.

(c) The activities of the Working Group, consistent with law, shall not duplicate the efforts of existing interagency bodies and coordination mechanisms. The Working Group shall consult with existing interagency bodies when appropriate.

(d) To inform its discussions, and pursuant to section 4 of Executive Order 12866, the Working Group may commission analytical reports and studies by OIRA, the Administrative Conference of the United States, or any other relevant agency, and the Administrator of OIRA may solicit input, from time to time, from representatives of business, nongovernmental organizations, and the public.

(e) The Working Group shall develop and issue guidelines on the applicability and implementation of sections 2 through 4 of this order.

(f) For purposes of this order, the Working Group shall operate by consensus.

Sec. 3. Responsibilities of Federal Agencies. To the extent permitted by law, and consistent with the principles and requirements of Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866, each agency shall:

(a) if required to submit a Regulatory Plan pursuant to Executive Order 12866, include in that plan a summary of its international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulations, with an explanation of how these activities advance the purposes of Executive Order 13563 and this order;

(b) ensure that significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts are designated as such in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, on RegInfo.gov, and on Regulations.gov;

(c) in selecting which regulations to include in its retrospective review plan, as required by Executive Order 13563, consider:

(i) reforms to existing significant regulations that address unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements between the United States and its major trading partners, consistent with section 1 of this order, when stakeholders provide adequate information to the agency establishing that the differences are unnecessary; and

(ii) such reforms in other circumstances as the agency deems appropriate; and

(d) for significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts, consider, to the extent feasible, appropriate, and consistent with law, any regulatory approaches by a foreign government that the United States has agreed to consider under a regulatory cooperation council work plan.

Sec. 4. Definitions. For purposes of this order:

(a) “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).

(b) “International impact” is a direct effect that a proposed or final regulation is expected to have on international trade and investment, or that otherwise may be of significant interest to the trading partners of the United States.

(c) “International regulatory cooperation” refers to a bilateral, regional, or multilateral process, other than processes that are covered by section 6(a)(ii), (iii), and (v) of this order, in which national governments engage in various forms of collaboration and communication with respect to regulations, in particular a process that is reasonably anticipated to lead to the development of significant regulations.

(d) “Regulation” shall have the same meaning as “regulation” or “rule” in section 3(d) of Executive Order 12866.

(e) “Significant regulation” is a proposed or final regulation that constitutes a significant regulatory action.

(f) “Significant regulatory action” shall have the same meaning as in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.

Sec. 5. Independent Agencies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order.

Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof;

(ii) the coordination and development of international trade policy and negotiations pursuant to section 411 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2451) and section 141 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2171);

(iii) international trade activities undertaken pursuant to section 3 of the Act of February 14, 1903 (15 U.S.C. 1512), subtitle C of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988, as amended (15 U.S.C. 4721 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2171 note);

(iv) the authorization process for the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements pursuant to 1 U.S.C. 112b(c) and its implementing regulations (22 C.F.R. 181.4) and implementing procedures (11 FAM 720);

(v) activities in connection with subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31 of the United States Code, title 26 of the United States Code, or Public Law 111-203 and other laws relating to financial regulation; or

(vi) the functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

 


EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO WESTERN STATES

05/15/2012

By Bob Unruh at http://www.wnd.com

The Obama administration has launched a new battle over water rights that threatens not only the the economies of arid Western states, which largely voted against him in the 2008 election, but their very existence.

WND reported last month that the federal government was creating obstacles for Tombstone, Ariz., to restore its water supplies following last year’s forest fire and monsoon-triggered floods in the nearby mountains. The federal government said crews could not use machinery to rebuild pipelines and spring-water collection systems.

Ads by Google

Now, a letter contradicting longstanding federal practice asserts a claim to water in arid Western states, such as Utah, Montana, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and others, that supersedes all other authorities, including decisions by state water courts.

“Federal water rights are entitled to a form of protection that is broader than what may be provided to similarly situated state law rights holders,” states a letter from Julie Decker, the deputy state director in the U.S. Department of the Interior to the Arizona Department of Water Resources.

The letter was objecting to state plans to do a routine “Designation of Adequate Water Supply,” which reviews water resources, rights and uses when changes are proposed.

Decker’s letter said water is not “legally” available for some users who may want to develop property in the area, because “the expressed federal reserved water right created by Congress is senior to all junior water users who initiate uses after the date of the establishment of the reservation.”

Nick Dranias, who holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute, called it an “existential threat to the Western states.”

The institute is fighting on behalf of Tombstone for its right to repair its water supply system and use the water.

A statement from the institute said the city of Tombstone “is no longer the only one fighting the federal government for water rights.”

“The latest move by the federal Bureau of Land Management appears to herald a bigger and much more comprehensive effort to seize water and access rights on federal lands throughout the Western states,” the statement said.

The newest dispute is the federal government’s letter concerning water rights in Arizona’s San Pedro Riparian watershed. The letter came in response to a request by Sierra Vista’s Pueblo del Sol Water Co., which claims water rights in the area but is being told it cannot use the water without the federal government’s permission.

“This new federal policy not only defies decades of deference to and accommodation of state sovereignty over water law, but it throws a noose around Arizona’s neck, for which water is life,” the institute said.

“The growing federal stranglehold over water rights in Arizona is a direct assault on state autonomy. There is perhaps no better way for the federal government to quell restive Western states, like Arizona, that dare to resist federal immigration, health care, and unionization policies.”

Dranias explained the situation to people in regions of the country where water is more plentiful.

“Water is the lifeblood of the arid Western states. Development would not exist without pretty intensive development of scarce water. That is only possible with the incentives created by ownership,” he said.

Without assurances that water is available, there is no possibility that economic development can occur, he said. In fact, some states have provisions, such as in Colorado, saying a homeowner cannot occupying a building unless a water right is documented for the structure.

He said it was only a few decades back that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a New Mexico case that the federal government deferred to states on water rights.

Now, however, the policy is being repudiated, threatening virtually every water user west of the Mississippi River.

Dranias cited the Tombstone dispute, in which federal officials won’t give the city permission to take equipment into a protected region to repair damage from a forest fire and monsoon-induced flooding. The city has obtained its water from the area since Wyatt Earp helped build a pipeline.

“The federal government doesn’t care about a direct threat to human life, a direct threat to property, a direct threat to the economy. It is will to risk all of that in pursuit of whatever they’re trying to claim as a superior position of water rights,” he said.

Tombstone, which can document through federal letters its ownership of the rights back 130 years, is in a far superior position to most water users in the West. Dranias told of Arizona ranchers who own specific spring-fed water rights but only leased rights-of-way for pipelines.

The federal government is demanding as a condition for renewing the pipeline permits that ranchers cede to the federal government all water ownership and rights, he said.

The radical “green,” or ecological, element appears to be playing a role, Dranias noted.

As part of the litigation over Tombstone’s water, he said, emails to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from various activists cheered the fires and floods that destroyed Tombstone’s water supply system.

“Hooray, the water’s running free again,” he said the emails expressed.

“Any state like Arizona … is facing the same situation,” he said.

Dranias said the fight over Tombstone’s water simply cannot be lost, because of the implications that could ripple across the nation, even beyond the West.

The state has declared the Tombstone situation an emergency, but, even so, federal officials refuse to allow repairs. Losing the case could set a precedent that emergency measures needed to mitigate oil spills and other environmental problems might not be allowed because of restrictions by the federal government, he said.

Federal officials have declined to answer questions about the court case.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Get this through your head folks, the federal government must be disbanded or the States will be history, either stand up and fight back, or sit down and shut the hell up. If you want to be slaves the U.N., move to France, or England.


Who Really Runs the World Part 4

05/13/2012

http://www.laleva.cc/economy/economy_greaves.html

Notes:
1 This is only a very basic account on how banks create money – for more debt ails and the problems it creates, see “Money & Banks – the hidden truth behind global debt” available from Richard Greaves. See document list below. For a very readable in depth study see “The Grip of Death – a study of modern money, debt slavery and destructive economics” by Michael Rowbotham. (Jon Carpenter 1998)

2 See “Germany’s War” in the Truth Campaign 23. The Truth Campaign is a quarterly magazine produced by Ivan Fraser and available from 49 Trevor Terrace, North Shields, Tyne & Wear, NE30 2DF.

3 For an in depth study of this and also how American companies such as Ford, General Motors, Standard Oil, Du Pont and others had stakes in German industry see “Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler” by Antony Sutton (Bloomfield Books 1976)

4 This is covered in detail in the book “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy – an investigative report exposing the truth about globalization corporate cons and high finance fraudsters” by Greg Palast (Pluto Press 2002).

Richard Greaves
Money, Banks and Debt
“Give me control of a nation’s money, and I care not who writes it’s laws…” Meyer Armschel Rothschild 1790

If you want to be the slaves of banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let the banks create money…” Josiah Stamp, Governor of the Bank of England 1920

Money is the medium which we use to exchange goods and services – so whoever controls the issue of money is potentially in a very powerful position.

Money is essential – without it, buying and selling would only be possible through exchange of goods themselves – hopelessly inconvenient. To keep trade and economic activity going, there has to be enough of this medium of exchange called money in existence to allow all this buying and selling to take place. When there is plenty, the economy booms. When there is a shortage, there is a slump. In the Great Depression, people wanted to work to earn money to support themselves, they wanted goods and services, all the raw materials for industry were available etc. yet national economies collapsed – why? …because there was far too little money in existence to allow full trading to take place. The only difference between boom and bust, growth and recession, is money supply.

So who is responsible for making sure that there is enough money in existence to cover all the buying and selling that people want to engage in? The answer is that it is almost entirely controlled by private banks through the process of “lending”.

The popular concept is that when a bank lends, it is simply lending money that other people have deposited with it. This is very misleading – the money loaned by banks is in fact new money created by them out of nothing. After all, when an overdraft or loan is made to someone, nothing is transferred from the accounts of those who have made deposits. All that happens is a note is made on the borrower’s account that he can spend up to, say, £5000. There may have been nothing in his account before that, but suddenly the borrower is allowed to make out cheques and draw cash to pay for goods and services, up to £5000. As he does so, this is actually new money being introduced into the economy. The people he pays will in turn use that money to pay for goods and services. Today in the developed world more than 95% of the total money supply has come into existence in this way as personal and business loans, mortgages, overdrafts etc. provided by commercial banks and financial institutions. However, borrowers must eventually repay the loans and pay interest to the banks in the meantime. So today’s money is in fact created by private interests for private profit. Only cash, which is provided by the government and now accounts for just 3% of the total money supply in Britain, (having fallen from nearly 50% just fifty years ago) is provided interest free.

Since the money supply is now almost entirely made up of loans etc., more money must be lent out to keep the economy going. This is why most of us are inundated with offers of loans, credit cards etc. If people don’t borrow or banks don’t lend, there will be a fall in the amount of money circulating, resulting in a reduction in buying and selling – a recession, slump or total collapse will follow depending on how severe the shortage is.

The increase in loans etc. created by banks etc. over the years is conclusive proof that banks do create “money” out of nothing – in Britain it was £1.2 billion in 1948 up to £14 billion by 1963 up to £680 billion by 1997. These are big increases in real terms even allowing for inflation – they have enabled the economy to expand enormously, and as a result living standards for many people have improved substantially…. but it has been done on borrowed money. What is credit to the bank is debt to the rest of us. [1]

This has some pretty far reaching implications – after all banks are businesses out to make profits from the interest on the loans they make. Since they decide to whom they will lend, they effectively decide what is produced, where it is produced and who produces it, all on the basis of profitability to the bank, rather than what is beneficial to the community. With bank created credit now at 95% + of money supply, entire economies are effectively run for the profit of financial institutions. This is the real power, rarely recognized or acknowledged, to which all of us including governments the world over are subject.

Our money, instead of being supplied interest free as a means of exchange, now comes as a debt owed to bankers providing them with vast profits, power and control, as the rest of us struggle with an increasing burden of debt…. There is much less risk to making loans than investing in a business. Interest is payable regardless of the success of the venture. If it fails or cannot meet the interest payments, the bank may seize and later sell the borrower’s property. Borrowing is extremely costly to borrowers who may end up paying back 2 or 3 times the sum lent. The banks are acquiring an ever increasing stake in our land, housing and other assets through the indebtedness of individuals, industry, agriculture, services and government – to the extent that Britain and the world are today effectively owned by them.

Furthermore, central banks such as the U.S. Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank which regulate the commercial banks and set interest rates are controlled not by elected governments but largely by private interests from the world of commercial banking. They are basically private banks. Even the Bank of England, although nationalised in 1946 (i.e. its shares were acquired by the state) is still largely under private control by virtue of the fact that its Court of Directors, the Monetary Policy Committee and its executive directors, who are responsible for the day to day running of the bank, are all dominated by bankers and conventional economists.

Not only are individuals and businesses in debt up to their eyeballs, but so are whole nations. Governments borrow money from banks in a similar way as individuals – in return they issue to the lender exchequer or treasury bonds – otherwise known as government stocks or securities. These are basically IOU’s – promises by government to repay the loan by a particular date, and to pay interest in the meantime.

The result of government borrowing is the national debt. British national debt now stands at about £400 billion – the annual interest on that debt is around £25 – £30 billion. The government raises this money by taxing you and me. National debt is up from £26 billion in 1960 and £90 billion in 1980. In addition, successive governments have borrowed this money into existence over the years.

However, if banks can create money out of nothing, then so can the state… in fact it already does so with the relatively very small amount of cash in the economy. Abraham Lincoln considered it a primary duty of the government to provide a nation with the medium of exchange to enable the economy to function. He proved the point by funding the Union war effort in the U.S. civil war with government created currency called “Greenbacks”, rather than taking out huge loans from the banks. He was of course assassinated and the creation of greenbacks was terminated. 100 years later John F. Kennedy had similar ideas and he too was to die at the hands of an assassin or assassins.

So instead of creating it themselves and spending it into the economy on public services and projects, boosting the economy and providing jobs, governments get banks to create it for them and then borrow it at interest.

It all started in 1694, when King William needed money to fight a war against France. He borrowed £1.2 million from a group of London bankers and goldsmiths. In return for the loan, they were incorporated by royal charter as the Bank of England, which became the government’s banker. Interest at 8% was payable on the loan and immediately taxes were imposed on a whole range of goods to pay the interest. This marked the birth of national debt. Ever since then the world over, governments have borrowed money from private banking interests and taxed the population as a whole to pay the interest. Governments could create as much money as is necessary to fund public projects and once spent by them into the economy when the projects are paid for, it would continue to circulate as interest free money. Instead the government constantly whines that there is never enough money for schools, hospitals etc. because it borrows much of what it needs, and this creates added expense through interest charges.

To fund a war effort, governments borrow massive amounts from the banks – British national debt soared as a result of fighting two world wars (from £0.7 billion in 1914 to £23 billion by 1946). War can be very profitable for bankers. By supplying credit to those of whom they approve and denying it to those of whom they disapprove, international bankers can not only create boom or bust supporting or undermining governments, they can also determine the outcome of a war….

Germany was not defeated on the battlefield in World War One – international bankers withdrew funding, whilst US banks funded Bolshevik agitators, armed by Moscow, who infiltrated Germany, triggering strikes and massive popular unrest. All this disrupted supplies and totally undermined the war effort – Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated and Germany was forced to surrender [2]. Thereafter, huge reparations were demanded, ensuring the total collapse into debt of the Weimar republic. International bankers set up the Dawes “recovery” plan which plunged Germany into even greater debt and economic chaos, creating the conditions for the rise of Hitler’s Nazi party. The same bankers went on, usually through highly covert means, to fund the rearmament of Germany and later the allies. As soon as a war was on the horizon, lending took place and the great depression came to an end almost over night. The names behind all this, such as Warburg, Rothschild and Rockefeller are still major power brokers in the banking world today [3].

More recently, one of the greatest contributions to debt third world debt was the fourfold increase in the price of oil in the 1970’s. Third world countries in severe difficulties because of the oil price hike, took out loans on crippling terms, as interest rates were raised sky high in the mid to late ‘70’s …and hey presto, the entire third world was suddenly indebted to the banks as well. Was this just some economic “accident”, was it just an OPEC decision to raise oil prices, or did someone else approve it as part of a bigger strategy? It is said that at the 1973 meeting of the Bilderberg group in Sweden, which was attended by top executives of the so called “Seven Sisters” oil cartel (the world’s 7 biggest oil companies B.P. Texaco etc.), a consensus was reached to bring about the oil price increases that subsequently followed.

It is widely, but mistakenly, believed that the purpose of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is to encourage development and relieve poverty in the third world, but in practice these organizations have added to the impoverishment of millions. They are based in Washington, they operate behind closed doors, they make loans, adding to the burden of debt and interest, and furthermore, the loans have strings attached in the form of “Structural Adjustment Programmes” (SAPs). SAPs are the response to the fact that so many countries could no longer meet the interest repayments on the big loans made since the ‘70s, thanks to the increased interest rates fixed by the banks. In practice, structural adjustment means major adjustments to economic and monetary policies to produce income to enable interest payments to be met.

Moreover, it has led to a corporate take-over with the sale of government and national assets by privatization, and massive cuts in public spending at the expense of basic healthcare and education etc. – also big drives to increase exports of whatever can be exported. This for example, leads to clearance of forests by timber companies, often foreign, for timber export, or for raising cattle to supply beef to the west, use of prime agricultural land for growing cash crops for consumption in wealthy countries, which already have surpluses, e.g. “out of season” vegetables, cut flowers, rice paddies in India becoming prawn farms to supply Japan etc. etc. This reduces staple food production for local consumption, putting prices up, and is the process that forces people from the land into city slums and shanties. Big plantations in the hands of multi-nationals or a rich local elite (well illustrated in Brazil) become the order of the day. Finally, there is absolute adherence to the principles of the “free market” and “free trade” – the effects of which have been noted already. With tariff barriers down, there are more imports, which increases the trade deficit, necessitating more loans with more interest payable, leading to more S.A.Ps with more strings attached, such that countries are now being forced to hand over control of their resources to outsiders, such as Mexico has effectively done to the U.S. with its oil industry.

In 1997 we saw how even the much praised “tiger economies” of the far east were brought under pressure by international speculators, with currencies collapsing. Most have fallen into line – Thailand, South Korea, Indonesia have taken out IMF “rescue packages” involving the taking out big loans with interest and all the other usual strings attached, that have already been mentioned. The same thing happened to Russia a year or so later. Very recently Joe Stilgitz a former chief economist at the World Bank blew the whistle on both the World Bank and the IMF to investigative journalist Greg Palast. It was revealed that nations were being required to sign detailed secret agreements, which committed them to sell off their key assets, and to take devastating economic steps. If they didn’t follow these steps they would be cut off from all international borrowing – clearly disastrous under the current system where no business, corporation or nation, can survive without credit. Palast now has recent inside documents from Argentina – the secret Argentine Plan – signed by World Bank President, James Wolfensen. Argentina is now in chaos, having had 6 presidents in as many weeks, because the economy is in ruins. And this happened because, in the late ‘80s, the IMF and World Bank ordered them to sell off public assets, such as the water system. And this is just one country. The Buenos Aires water system was sold to the now notorious Enron as was the pipeline between Argentina and Chile.

Furthermore it has been revealed that the leaders and chief ministers of these countries have salted away hundreds of millions of dollars into Swiss bank accounts in the process, whilst the IMF and the World Bank with full knowledge of what was happening, have looked the other way. The water systems, railways, telephone companies, nationalized oil companies etc. are then transferred to western corporate interests for next to nothing. They have been handed over, generally, to the likes of Citibank which grabbed half the Argentine banks, British Petroleum which grabbed pipelines in Ecuador and Enron which has grabbed water systems all over the place. To make matters worse they don’t even run the utilities properly – but this is much more than just a few fat cats getting rich at the public expense – it’s about absolute power and control and the cozy relationships between banking and big business. [4]

Banks making losses is almost unknown. In a bust cycle, they make their profits by seizing the assets of those who can no longer repay the loans, as a result of a downturn in business, through banks putting up interest rates, which reduces the amount of money in circulation. Later they can sell the seized assets, when they issue money and make loans so that there is money for them to be purchased by others, in a wonderful example of having your cake and eating it. In the boom cycles, there are masses of interest payments coming in as more and more money is issued and lent. The 1980’s property boom came about as a result of a huge influx of new money coming into circulation through massive lending. Prices soared with all the credit available, ensuring we all went more and more into debt with ever larger mortgages to our homes. Then interest rates rose…. and bankruptcies and repossessions in 1991and 1992 reached record levels. A financial crisis, usually brought about by a big interest rate increase, results in the banks seizing assets and adding to their wealth.

Every time you make a purchase, you are making a payment into the banking system, for built in to the cost of whatever item you are purchasing, is the interest that the producer, manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer has had to pay to a bank. Add to that, the fact that you might be paying interest on a mortgage, an overdraft, a credit card, or all three. You are also paying the interest on the national debt through your taxes, and your council tax is hiked because the local authority is in debt as well…. You begin to realize just how much wealth is siphoned off to the banks and how many extra hours you have to work and struggle to create this wealth.

This is the power and control that debt has over us all and gives to those to whom we are in debt. If you buy a house in Britain with a large mortgage, by the time you have paid off the loan, you will have paid for the house about 3 times over, and in the meantime can you really say you own it, because if you can’t meet the repayments (and you have no control over the interest rates charged)you can be evicted. Is it any wonder that the traditional teachings of Christianity and Islam so wisely forbid the loan of money upon usury? Debt is truly the modern form of slavery.

To return to where we started, money is the means of facilitating the exchange of goods and services. There is nothing wrong with creating it out of nothing, because this is the only way to provide the means of exchange. To avoid inflation, the amount that is printed or created must be matched to the amount of economic activity that is taking place. What is wrong is that the right to do this has almost entirely passed from the state to private interests who create it as loans for private profit. Consider for a moment a system where a democratically elected government takes over the issue of money and decides to stimulate the economy by making interest free loans through a national credit office (the cost of which could be met by a modest level of taxation or the levying of fixed administrative charges on borrowers or even a share in the profits of a borrower’s business venture or a combination of all three). Thousands of entrepreneurs would take up loans on such attractive terms, a major cause of inflation would be gone, and economic activity would boom creating masses of those ever elusive jobs that governments profess themselves to be so concerned about. However it is clear that many bankers, economists and almost all politicians do not really understand the existing system and its far reaching effects. They support it largely through ignorance, and the fact that it has been in use for years and there are no alternatives operating anywhere. However there have always been those who realise how the introduction and maintenance of an usury banking system can be used to retain power and control and they rely on the continuing ignorance of the majority. It is now so universal that there is hardly a man, woman or child on the planet, who is not paying the price of this iniquitous system.


THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN THE WORLD

05/12/2012

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom213.htm

by Tom DeWeese

NewsWithViews.com

 

Ed Note: This is a speech I first gave to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in 1996, just four years after the UN’s Earth Summit in Rio. At the time I gave this address there were strong indications that Maurice Strong could be chosen as the next UN Secretary General. It didn’t happen, but that didn’t diminish his influence over the body. In fact, In 1996 all roads in the UN led to Maurice Strong. This speech represented the first time that the CPAC audience and most conservatives had ever heard of the radical agenda of the environmental movement. It was probably the first time the term Sustainable Development was ever heard by a conservative audience. In fact, at the time I gave this speech, environmentalism was the most popular and most powerful movement in the world. Yet, here, 15 years before “Climategate” I was revealing the very root of what was to become the “Climate Change” movement and its drive to destroy the industrial West. By the way, tapes of this speech became the most popular of any ever produced by the American Policy Center and continues to be one of our best sellers. TD

Let me begin by asking you a few questions. They may seem rather silly – but I have a point. So, please, just indulge me for a moment – just answer with a show of hands:

How many of you know of Adolf Hilter – and that he was evil? How many of you know Mao Tse Tung – and that he was evil? How many of you know of Lenin and Stalin – and that they were evil?

How many of you know of Maurice Strong – and that he is evil?

There is the point of my questions. Maurice Strong has the potential to be the most powerful and most evil dictator the world has ever known – right now – today – in our day and age – and yet, most of you have never heard of him.

So let me sound the warning bell – loud and long. Maurice Strong will, in all likely hood be the next Secretary General of the United Nations.

Now, you may be wondering why I’m talking about the subject of the United Nations when this panel is about the assault on property rights. What does Maurice Strong have to do with American property Rights? Everything.

The assault on property rights – in fact the entire radical environmental agenda – is being driven by the United Nations. And Maurice Strong is the number one force behind UN environmental policy. Maurice Strong is the leader of a radical contingent of Environmentalists that believe technology and modern industrialization must be stopped.

Does that sound overstated or too extreme? Well, let me read you a much more radical statement and these are not my words – they’re Maurice Strong’s:

In 1992, Strong told a UN conference…:“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work place air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.”

Now, let me explain this new term “Sustainable” that you will see popping up in environmental policy more and more. Radical greens believe that all of man’s activities on Earth are harmful (and therefore not sustainable). They believe that man is a cancer on the Earth. Their goal is to slowly cut back and finally end all development and reduce human habitat to specific areas while the rest of the world is turned into wilderness.

Maurice Strong and his buddies are the driving force behind a ndw age pagan religion known as Gaia. It is pure nature worship. Strong owns a 63 thousand acre ranch in Colorado called Baca Grande that will never be bothered by the Forest Service or the Army Corp of Engineers. Because Baca Grande is the Mecca for Gaia worshippers and mystics. Here, Strong has built a temple to a Babylonian Sun God. Baca Grande, Strong believes, is the “Vatican City” of the New World Order.

Maurice Strong is also a director of the Temple of Understanding in New York City, where pagan rituals and earth worship include escorting sheep and cattle to the alter for a blessing. Elephants and camels walk the aisles. A soprano sax is used to create the sound of the wolf moaning its extinction at the hand of man. Here, Vice President Al Gore delivered a “sermon” as worshippers marched to the alter with bowls of compost and worms.

This wacky scene is the basis for today’s environmental agenda that has grown way beyond a call for clean air and the recycling of plastic bottles and newspapers. In Maurice Strong’s Gaia- driven world – it’s OK for a beaver to build a dam – but not man. It’s OK for a bear to fish in the lake – but not man.

It’s OK for a wolf to eat meat (especially if it’s the farmer’s sheep – but not man. Suffice it to say that no human activity is “Sustainable.”

So, when Maurice Strong speaks of Man’s consumption of meat, the use of air conditioning, or the ownership of suburban housing, can there be any doubt what he plans for the future? Can there be any doubt where he intends to take the United Nations once he’s Secretary General?

Maybe this will make it clearer. In yet another interview, Maurice Strong said, “It is not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful.” That’s the Constitutional sovereignty of the United States he is talking about. And what does he plan to do about it?

You may have heard recent reports that the United Nations is floating the ideas for global taxation to fund the UN’s activities. There has been a lot of whining that the UN can’t live on its members’ contributions and that sound economics demand that it find an independent way to sustain itself. The media is reporting these taxation ideas as just possibilities. But the plan is very well along toward implementation, and Maurice Strong is the driving force behind it.

Strong said in 1994 “the 50th anniversary of the UN provides a unique opportunity to restructure and revitalize the UN to prepare for the vastly increased role it must have as the primary multilateral framework of a new world order.”

Current UN plans call for a permanent volunteer army, conversion of the international monetary fund into a world central bank and the adoption of the concept of global taxation. Just one of Strong’s taxation schemes would pour over $1.5 trillion into UN coffers.

Now, it is extremist, radical fringe and politically incorrect to suggest that the United Nations is engaged in a drive for one world government. It is well known, – according to our president and the news media, – that the UN is only interested in promoting world peace and stability. So you won’t hear such radical statements from me.

But it does cause concern when a man, who believes that industrialized society is the most vile, evil structure on earth, is placed in charge of an organization, without general election, and that body is able to reap trillions of dollars of income, answerable to no one, with its own army, its own world bank and treaties signed by every nation on earth giving it control over policy and development.

And the United States has signed such treaties – lots of them – with many more pending. And the Clinton administration is using every means necessary to assure all such UN treaties are signed into American law. And virtually all of Strong’s ideas and beliefs are reflected in those treaties. Maybe I’m just paranoid – but all of that concerns me.

But there’s more – Maurice Strong, the man who will soon rule the United Nations’ empire, the man who will control the UN’s army and its massive income and will be unelected by any of us – wants to write a novel.

During an interview for “West” magazine, Strong mused about the plot of his novel. It reveals much about how the man thinks.

According to Strong’s book idea, each year, world leaders would meet in Switzerland for an economic forum. These leaders would decide that the only way the planet could survive would be for the rich nations to voluntarily agree to reduce consumption. Strong goes on to explain that, in his novel, the rich countries do not sign such agreements, so the world leaders decide the only way to save the planet is to bring down industrialized societies.

They create a secret society and place its members in strategic government positions and at the helm of critical financial institutions. Then at meetings of the forum in Switzerland, mercenaries are hired to hold the world leaders hostage while the members of the secret society proceed to crash the world’s economy by jamming the gears of the commodity and stock markets preventing any of the world’s markets from closing.

Within hours, “the rich countries…” Strong stopped the story and flicked his fingers as if he were tossing a cigarette butt. – gone.

Maurice Strong today controls the UN’s Business Council for Sustainable Development. It is a hand picked group of 50 of the world’s most powerful business leaders. Among them: Kenneth Derr of Chevron and William Ruckleshous. Both Derr and Ruchelshous now serve on the President’s Council on Sustainable Development.

Within the next few weeks President Clinton will announce the report on his Council on Sustainable Development and that will become Clinton’s blue print for environmental policy. This document comes straight out of the United Nations. – straight out of the cunning mind of Maurice Strong.

That environmental policy calls for turning 50% of every American state into wilderness, it will destroy industry and jobs and take away private property rights. And it will tie American sovereignty directly to United National policies. It has nothing to do with preserving clean air and water. It has everything to do with Maurice Strong’s demented drive for power.

Throughout history tyrants have sought to rule the world. Always their efforts to achieve that goal have brought harsh dictatorship and misery. Always men have asked how these mad escapades were possible. America was created to prevent it.

Hitler, Mao and Stalin were amateurs compared to Maurice Strong – because he’s well on his way to world dictatorship without ever firing a shot.

The biodiversity treaty and UN Heritage Sites are being implemented on American soil right now. And property owners are already suffering as environmental policies are taking their land and their jobs.

There is only one way to fight back. Only one way to stop Maurice Strong’s Drive for power. In this day of MTV politics and 10 second sound bite policy statements let me give you a sound bite as the solution. Shout it from the rafters. Demand it of your elected representatives. Make it your personal political goal.

(you can say it with me) Get the United States out of the United Nations.

(say it again as loud as you can) Get the United States out of the United Nations. And keep saying it until someone hears you.

© 2012 Tom DeWeese – All Rights Reserved

 

Related Articles:

1-    Agenda 21, the end of Western Civilization
2- Tea Party Candidate Warns of UN and Obama’s Agenda 21
3- U.N. Biospheres: A Scheme to Control People and Their Land

Toms Archives http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tomA.htm


Tom DeWeese is one of the nation’s leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property rights, personal privacy, back-to-basics education and American sovereignty and independence.

A native of Ohio, he’s been a candidate for the Ohio Legislature, served as editor of two newspapers, and has owned several businesses since the age of 23. In 1989 Tom led the only privately-funded election-observation team to the Panamanian elections. In 2006 Tom was invited to Cambridge University to debate the issue of the United Nations before the Cambridge Union, a 200 year old debating society. Today he serves as Founder and President of the American Policy Center and editor of The DeWeese Report

For 40 years Tom DeWeese has been a businessman, grassroots activist, writer and publisher. As such, he has always advocated a firm belief in man’s need to keep moving forward while protecting our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

The DeWeese Report , 70 Main Street, Suite 23, Warrenton Virginia. (540) 341-8911

E-Mail: admin@americanpolicy.org

E-Mail: ampolicycenter@hotmail.com

Website: www.americanpolicy.org

 


IS THE SOROS SPONSORED AGENDA 21 A HIDDEN PLAN FOR WORLD GOVERNMENT YES ONLY IT IS NOT HIDDEN

05/10/2012

by Mike Opelka

Also read: http://www.newswithviews.com/Barnewall/marilyn166.htm

ATTACHED IS A LIST OF U.S. CITIES THAT ARE MEMBERS OF ICLEI – THE “SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT” ARM OF AGENDA 21.  IF YOUR CITY IS A MEMBER, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.  FROM MY ARTICLE A YEAR AGO:

As you read this article, keep these words in mind:

“No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto law, or Law impairing the obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.”Article 1, Section 10, The United States Constitution

That Section of the Constitution prevents membership of states, cities and counties in an organization called International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)… but I’ll bet many readers of this article live in a city, town, or county that belongs to ICLEI because ICLEI has more than 600 active members throughout the United States. Those members are cities, counties, and states, not individuals.

To see if your city, county or state is a member of ICLEI, click here.

If your state is spending your tax dollars to violate Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution to pay for membership in ICLEI, you need to do something about it. The Constitution says no state should enter into an alliance with a group devoted to supporting international policies unfriendly to America.

BARNEWALL ARTICLE:  http://www.newswithviews.com/Barnewall/marilyn166.htm

ICLEI ISN’T THE ONLY AGENDA 21 GROUP… IT’S JUST ONE OF MANY.  IF YOUR CITY’S NAME ISN’T ON THIS LIST, YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT OTHER LISTS.  MB

GOVERNMENT
IS THE SOROS-SPONSORED ‘AGENDA 21’ A HIDDEN PLAN FOR WORLD GOVERNMENT? (YES, ONLY IT IS NOT HIDDEN)by Mike OpelkaWhat is Agenda 21?  If you do not know about it, you should.

Agenda 21 is a two-decade old, grand plan for global ’Sustainable Development,’ brought to you from the United Nations. George H.W. Bush (and 177 other world leaders) agreed to it back in 1992, and in 1995, Bill Clinton signed Executive Order #12858, creating a Presidential Council on ‘Sustainable Development.’ This effectively pushed the UN plan into America’s large, churning government machine without the need for any review or discussion by Congress or the American people.

‘Sustainable Development’ sounds like a nice idea, right?  It sounds nice, until you scratch the surface and find that Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development are really cloaked plans to impose the tenets of Social Justice/Socialism on the world.

At risk from Agenda 21;

  • Private Property ownership
  • Single-Family homes
  • Private car ownership and individual travel choices
  • Privately owned farms

The Agenda 21 plan openly targets private property.  For over thirty-five years the UN has made their stance very clear on the issue of individuals owning land;

Land… cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole.

Source: United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I),Vancouver, BC, May 31 – June 11, 1976. Preamble to Agenda Item 10 of the Conference Report.

There are two more, very good reasons to be wary of Agenda 21 and the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) that supports it: George Soros and the United Nations. Soros money has been tracked to funding parts of ICLEI ;

In 1997, George Soros’s Open Society gave ICLEI a $2,147,415 grant to support its Local Agenda 21 Project

As regards the UN, that organization‘s problems with America’s appreciation of freedom and self-determination is one that needs no explanation.

Currently in California, Agenda 21 is working to implement plans to create plans for sustainable management of ‘open spaces.‘ The definition of what is to be considered an ’open space’ has sparked some heated exchanges between those directing the planning meetings and citizens who want private property rights to be respected and protected. (The East Bay Tea Party video featuring a Liberal Democrat arguing against ICLEI can be seen at the end of this article.)

This type of global plan could not be implemented without a large and well-funded group pushing through its priorities. For that, Agenda 21 has the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). And ICLEI is deeply entrenched in America;

ICLEI USA was launched in 1995 and has grown from a handful of local governments participating in a pilot project to a solid network of more than 600 cities, towns and counties actively striving to achieve tangible reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and create more sustainable communities. ICLEI USA is the domestic leader on climate protection and adaptation, and sustainable development at the local government level.

Over six hundred cities,towns and counties in America are members of ICLEI? Do you support your local government agreeing to rules and regulations set up by a UN-based organization that wants private property transferred to government control? If you would like to see if your community is a member of ICLEI, you can visit their website.

Austin, Texas is one city that seems to have fallen for the ICLEI/Agenda 21 and was heavily consuming the ‘Communitariasm’ Kool-aid. A local group called Texans For Accountable Government saw what was happening and attempted to stop the Austin City Council from adopting some Agenda 21-friendly initiatives. One of TAG’s members, John Bush, delivered a succinct presentation on ICLEI and Agenda 21 that was virtually ignored. Watch his short argument against the proposed local law immediately followed by the lopsided vote adopting the plan.

In the world of business Agenda 21 is not a free market friend, preferring PPPs or Private Public Partnerships where the government decides which companies will receive tax breaks and are allowed to stay in business. In light of this realization, the cozy relationship between the current administration and GE (a company that paid no tax in 2010) should raise eyebrows. And the WH efforts to tell Boeing in which state they can operate seems to further bolster the belief that Agenda 21 ideals are already making headway in America.

The seeds for Agenda 21 were planted back in 1987 when the writings of Gro Harlem Brundtland(a woman who was first Vice-President of the Socialist International) caught the eye of the UN.  Dr. Brundtland wrote a report for the UN called, ‘Our Common Future’ eventually got into the business of environmentalism as a tool to control all the people of the world and establish a global government. The growth of ICLEI and the framework being put in place by supporters of Agenda 21 appear to be bringing Dr. Brundtland’s ideas closer to reality

In recent months, citizen groups across the country have organized and become involved in the removal of towns and cities from membership in ICLEI. The Roanoke, VA Tea Party is holding a rally this week in an effort to have ICLEI removed from their local government.

For a better understanding of Agenda 21 and ICLEI we suggest: The American Policy Center offers a one-page primer on Agenda 21.

From the Bay Area Tea Party we offer a long-form video covering Agenda 21;

The featured speaker at the Tea Party meeting, Rosa Koire, is a liberal Democrat who understands that Agenda 21 will destroy America as we know it. Rosa’s website,DemocratsAgainstAgenda21.com is also worth a visit.

H/T to the tireless members of the SFBAY 9-12 organization for all of their information sharing on the topics of ICLEI and Agenda 21.


The Duty of the Military in a Militarized Empire

05/08/2012

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/04/duty-of-military-in-militarized-empire.html#more

SARTRE, Contributor

Activist Post

Those who serve in the military are in a difficult position. Theoath taken by enlistees states, “I, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

The internal conflict between supporting and defending the Constitution and obeying orders is at the heart of the dilemma of honor and duty. Those who accept that the Presidential chain of command is by nature constitutional, lack a proper understanding of history and professes an even greater ignorance of current affairs.

Ever since Congress abrogated their lawful war power authority to declare war, the military-industrial complex has embarked on a path of global empire. The consequences of such un-American internationalist imperialism have turned the country into a hollow shell of a once great nation. NeoCons and their liberal cousin counterparts champion perpetual interventionism and continuous overseas deployment, and deny this stark reality.

False flag operations used as incessant excuses to expand the permanent war machine, demean and ultimately will destroy the moral purpose of our country. Propaganda and disinformation used to spread the jingoism fever infects the body politic. Those who remember the disgusting treatment, upon the separation from service, of Viet Nam draftees welcome the positive homage of recent military personnel.
However, there is an attitude that challenges all the flag waving and medal awards. Gary D. Barnett presents a viewpoint that is not shared by most military brass. Mr. Barnett writes in Thank You for Your Service? No Thanks!

What service is actually being praised by those conditioned to say these empty words? Why are they thanking and praising nearly every soldier they see?

Is it because hatred of the U.S. is increasing, and new enemies are being created in the Middle East and all around the rest of the world?

Is it because thousands and thousands of innocent people are being killed now in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and many more are being threatened?

Is it because 20,000,000 to 30,000,000 foreigners, mostly innocent civilians, have died just since World War II due to U.S. interference and war?

Is it because indefinite detention without due process, torture, assassination, and rendition are now common and accepted practices?

Is it because suicide rates among American soldiers have increased 80% since the Iraq War began?

Is it because mental problems now send more military personnel to the hospital than any other cause?

Is it because destruction and separation of military families is rampant?

Is it because civil liberties have all but disappeared due to so-called terrorism legislation? (Terror legislation would be more accurate).

Is it because of the creation of the USA PATRIOT Act, Military Commissions Act, NDAA, TSA, and Department of Homeland Security (DHS)?

Is it because of the massive buildup of killer drones abroad and at home?

Is it because the huge deficit spending to support multiple aggressive wars is causing economic chaos?

Is it because of the surging number of double amputees of American soldiers?

Is it because of increasing energy costs due to the United States unwarranted presence in the Middle East region?

Is it because the domestic police have now become a brutal militarized force, bent on controlling the entire population?

This perspective fundamentally challenges the underlying foreign policy that structures military expenditures to project superpower force at the expense of actual domestic defense.As long as the National Security Council and the State Department pursues the policeman of the world policy, the military will be asked to implement unnecessary austerity that perpetuates the corrupt “world community” dominated by a financial tyranny. No wonder that the blowback against our real interests is the only sure response that comes from such foreign adventures.

Full Spectrum Dominance is no substitute for true national security.

The war on terror is an excuse to divert attention from the accelerated loss of rights and freedoms. Each step may seem insignificance and subtle, but the direction is always undeniable. Fear from any foreign threat seldom extends to the measures instituted by the domestic authority. Willingness to forget that legitimacy for your government is based upon your consent is epidemic. People are eager to demonstrate their devotion to the State, as they surrender their birthright as if it meant nothing.

The source of the scourge that underpins obeying unlawful orders stems from a false obedience. Criminal civilian commands are not legitimate authority. The unconstitutionality of the National Defense Authorization Act is clear. Brian J. Trautman, a military veteran writes on the NDAA,

This year’s legislation contains highly controversial provisions that empower the Armed Forces to engage in civilian law enforcement and to selectively suspend due process and habeas corpus, as well as other rights guaranteed by the 5th and 6th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, for terror suspects apprehended on U.S. soil. The final version of the bill passed the House on December 14, the Senate the following day (ironically, the 220th birthday of the Bill of Rights). It was signed into law by President Obama on New Year’s Eve. With his signature, for the first time since the Internal Security Act of 1950 and the dark days of the McCarthy era that followed, our government has codified the power of indefinite detention into law.

Nothing new about laws or executive orders that strip constitutional protections, so what can an honest American serving in the military services do in response to their duty? Stewart Rhodes, founder of OathKeepers talks about the NDAA and provides the answer in the video Organizing a Military Stand Down Against NDAA. PFC Bradley Manning comes to mind when an active service personnel reveals the sins and dictates of the foreign policy elites. Kim Zetter reports in Wired,

Manning is charged with 22 violations of military law for allegedly stealing records and transmitting defense information in violation of the Espionage Act, among other charges, which could get him up to life in prison if he’s convicted. In chat logs, Manning said he leaked the cables because he felt that the world needed to be aware of military activities that he believed were potentially illegal.

The Bradley Manning media coverage is an essential blackout of the extent that the foreign policy psychopaths who provide the orders for the military establishment is the cause of the anguish and death that responsible soldiers endure.

The officer corps ultimately bears the heaviest burden for enforcing illegal orders. The basic principle that honorable duty resides in the protection of the nation, should be accepted. However, the practical application falls dramatically short when the military substitute the office of the Presidency as the essence of the nation. Willingness to follow the commands of a dictator directly leads to the Gary D. Barnett assessment.

Where is the line that needs to be drawn that neutralizes the treason that routinely comes out of the corridors of power? The Pentagon is comprised of careerists that all too often are willing to sacrifice the safety of the American public for their own advancement. War games never take into account that the immediate enemies of our country hold office, administer imperial policies and work for the financial oligarchy.

The globalists are more than plutocrats; they are the ultimate and true enemy. The critical duty that military resides in a commitment to a genuine America First foreign policy. The Commander and Chief, no matter who occupies the Oval Office, is a mere selected puppet that is on a short leash.

The military needs to refuse unlawful orders by standing down, and standing up for a constitutional republic.

Original article archived here

SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce.  SARTRE is the publisher of BREAKING ALL THE RULES. Contact batr@batr.org


KISSINGER: OBAMA PRIMED TO CREATE “NEW WORLD ORDER”

05/06/2012

http://www.wnd.com/2009/01/85442/

Also posted at 

http://anationbeguiled.com/?p=5324

Conflicts across the globe and an international respect for Barack Obama have created the perfect setting for establishment of “a New World Order,” according to Henry Kissinger, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former secretary of state under President Nixon.

Kissinger has long been an integral figure in U.S. foreign policy, holding positions in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations. Author of over a dozen books on foreign policy, Kissinger was also named by President Bush as the chairman of the Sept. 11 investigatory commission.

Kissinger made the remark in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” hosts Mark Haines and Erin Burnett at the New York Stock Exchange, after Burnett asked him what international conflict would define the Obama administration’s foreign policy.

Read
“Hope of the Wicked,” where author Ted Flynn reveals the greatest
deception in modern history – corporations, foundations and governments
converging to bring about a New World Order.

“The president-elect is coming into office at a moment when there is upheaval in many parts of the world simultaneously,” Kissinger responded. “You have India, Pakistan; you have the jihadist movement. So he can’t really say there is one problem, that it’s the most important one. But he can give new impetus to American foreign policy partly because the reception of him is so extraordinary around the world. His task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created. It’s a great opportunity, it isn’t just a crisis.”

The phrase ‘new world order’ traces back at least as far as 1940, when author H.G. Wells used it as the title of a book about a socialist, unified, one-world government. The phrase has also been linked to American presidents, including Woodrow Wilson, whose work on establishing the League of Nations pioneered the concept of international government bodies, and to the first President Bush, who used it in a 1989 speech.

“A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment,” said Bush before a joint session of Congress. “Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective – a new world order – can emerge: A new era … in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony.”

The phrase “New World Order” causes alarm for many Americans, particularly those concerned about an international governing body trumping U.S. sovereignty or those that interpret biblical prophecy to foretell the establishment of a one-world government as key to the rise of the Antichrist. Conspiracy theorists, too, have latched on to the phrase, concerned that powerful financial or government figures are secretly plotting to rule the world.

Kissinger’s ties to government and international powers – as well as his use of the phrase – have made him suspect in the eyes of many who are wary of what “new world order” might actually mean.

“There is a need for a new world order,” Kissinger told PBS interviewer Charlie Rose last year, “I think that at the end of this administration, with all its turmoil, and at the beginning of the next, we might actually witness the creation of a new order – because people looking in the abyss, even in the Islamic world, have to conclude that at some point, ordered expectations must return under a different system.”

As WND reported, Kissinger was also part of last year’s super-secret Bilderberg Group, an organization of powerful international elites, including government, business, academic and journalistic representatives, that has convened annually since 1954.

According to sources that have penetrated the high-security meetings, the Bilderberg meetings emphasize a globalist agenda and promote the idea that the notion of national sovereignty is antiquated and regressive.

CNBC’s Haines concluded the Kissinger interview by asking, “Are you confident about the people President-elect Obama has chosen to surround him?”

Kissinger replied, “He has appointed an extraordinarily able group of people in both the international and financial fields.”

While We Were Looking The Other Way–Obama To Be First President To Chair UN Security Council

 

http://rightsoup.com/while-we-were-looking-the-other-way-obama-to-be-first-president-to-chair-un-security-council/

Posted by: Erin

Some unprecedented news today, folks. Never in the history of the United Nations has a U.S. President taken the chairmanship of the powerful UN Security Council. Perhaps it is because of what could arguably be a Constitutional prohibition against doing so. To wit: Section 9 of the Constitution says:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

The UN has a standing military force, we are held to it’s global policies, and we have an Ambassador to the UN just as we do to other foreign States. Clearly the argument can be made that the UN can be considered a foreign State. Our heads of State don’t serve at the UN, Ambassadors do.

Nonetheless, the rotating chairmanship of the UN Security Council goes to the U.S. this month. The normal course of business would have U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice take the gavel. However, this time will be different. Constitution be damned, Barack Hussein Obama has decided to put HIMSELF in the drivers seat, and will preside over global nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament talks slated to begin September 24th. The Financial Times says:

Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.

The topic for the summit-level session of the council on September 24 is nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament – one of several global challenges that the US now wants to see addressed at a multinational level.

UN officials also hope a climate change debate on September 22 will give fresh impetus to the search for a global climate deal at Copenhagen in December. There are also hopes a possible meeting between Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli prime minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Authority president, that Mr. Obama would host, could lead to a breakthrough about a timetable for Middle East peace.

Here is what the UN Security Council does. Picture Obama as the Chair of this committee with this power.

Under the UN Charter, the functions and powers of the Security Council are:

* to maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations;
* to investigate any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction;
* to recommend methods of adjusting such disputes or the terms ofsettlement;
* to formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate armaments;
* to determine the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression and to recommend what action should be taken;
* to call on Members to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving the use of force to prevent or stop aggression;
* to take military action against an aggressor;
* to recommend the admission of new Members;
* to exercise the trusteeship functions of the United Nations in “strategic areas”;
* to recommend to the General Assembly the appointment of the Secretary-General and, together with the Assembly, to elect the Judges of the International Court of Justice.

No American president has ever attempted to acquire the image of King of the Universe by officiating at a meeting of the UN’s highest body. Obama apparently believes that being flanked by council-member heads of state like Col. Moammar Qaddafi — who is expected to be seated five seats to Obama’s right — will cast a sufficiently blinding spell on Americans.

He undoubtedly hopes that the horrid state of the nation’s economy, turmoil over health care, and a summer of racial scapegoating will pale by comparison. This role as UN Security Council chair will allow him to make decisions, influence legislation and resolutions, and set the agenda.

Right Soup will be closely following this very unsettling turn of events. Like I always say, pay attention to what Obama DOES, not just what he says.

Share this Right Soup with others:

Related Posts on Right Soup:

Most Recent Posts on Right Soup:

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Lord, we pray that you will infect the body and brains of the International Banking Cartel with worms to eat them from the inside out, and all of those who have supported them these many years, and especially this usurper scumbag in the oval office. Send their souls to everlasting torment.

Restore America to a lawful government, and the minds of the citizens to full cognition of the benefits of being independent, self controlled and responsible for their own conduct. Men who need no guidance from anyone but you.

In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen

James P. Harvey

olddog@anationbeguiled.com


Obama Signs Executive Order Declaring International Law for the United States

05/05/2012

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/obama-signs-executive-order-declaring-international-law-for-the-united-states/14439

                                                                                                       

by Henry Shivley

On May 1, 2012, our Glorious Leader, Premier Barack Obama AKA Barry Soetoro AKA Barry the Rat, signed yet another Executive Order – Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation.  This dictate is designed to standardize regulations between the United States and it’s so called trading partners.

What is a regulation?  A law.  So what is actually being attempted here is a standardization of international law.  It is an absolute violation of the Constitution for the United States to legislate our law outside of our borders.

Considering the many international security agreements the traitors occupying our highest seats of power have entered into, this latest executive order can absolutely be used to institute gun confiscation laws/regulations, without any consent by our Congress or our Judicial.  And once these foreign laws are brought to the United States under the various security agreements, foreign troops will be brought in to enforce the foreign laws upon the people of the United States.

So look at what we have now.

  • The Patriot Act which allows unlimited spying on the American people by the government.
  • The National Defense Authorization Act with Sections 1021 and 1022 for the military arrests and indefinite detention of American nationals without any due process of the law.
  • HR 347 Trespass Law for the implementation of Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act upon any citizen who dares to speak out against the insurgency.
  • Executive Order National Defense Resources Preparedness Act, which allows the dictator to confiscate every resource of the United States, including we the people as conscripts to be put in servitude to the insurgency.

This is exactly what the Bolsheviks did to the Russian people in 1917.  Now we have this new executive order for the implementation of laws not legislated by our Congress.  If we were to allow ourselves to be disarmed by these international soviet socialists, the next step would be to eliminate everyone who refuses to acquiesce to collective slavery.

This latest executive order is nothing more than another act of blatant treason and we the American people must reject it absolutely.

Here is the Executive Order.  Read and interpret it for yourself.

EXECUTIVE ORDER
– – – – – – –
PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY COOPERATION

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to promote international regulatory cooperation, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1Policy. Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), states that our regulatory system must protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation. In an increasingly global economy, international regulatory cooperation, consistent with domestic law and prerogatives and U.S. trade policy, can be an important means of promoting the goals of Executive Order 13563.

The regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may differ from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address similar issues. In some cases, the differences between the regulatory approaches of U.S. agencies and those of their foreign counterparts might not be necessary and might impair the ability of American businesses to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.

Sec2Coordination of International Regulatory Cooperation. (a) The Regulatory Working Group (Working Group) established by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), which was reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563, shall, as appropriate:
(i) serve as a forum to discuss, coordinate, and develop a common understanding among agencies of U.S. Government positions and priorities with respect to:
(A) international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulatory actions;
(B) efforts across the Federal Government to support significant, cross-cutting international regulatory cooperation activities, such as the work of regulatory cooperation councils; and

(C) the promotion of good regulatory practices internationally, as well as the promotion of U.S. regulatory approaches, as appropriate; and

(ii) examine, among other things:

(A) appropriate strategies for engaging in the development of regulatory approaches through international regulatory cooperation, particularly in emerging technology areas, when consistent with section 1 of this order;

(B) best practices for international regulatory cooperation with respect to regulatory development, and, where appropriate, information exchange and other regulatory tools; and

(C) factors that agencies should take into account when determining whether and how to consider other regulatory approaches under section 3(d) of this order.

(b) As Chair of the Working Group, the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) shall convene the Working Group as necessary to discuss international regulatory cooperation issues as described above, and the Working Group shall include a representative from the Office of the United States Trade Representative and, as appropriate, representatives from other agencies and offices.

(c) The activities of the Working Group, consistent with law, shall not duplicate the efforts of existing interagency bodies and coordination mechanisms. The Working Group shall consult with existing interagency bodies when appropriate.

(d) To inform its discussions, and pursuant to section 4 of Executive Order 12866, the Working Group may commission analytical reports and studies by OIRA, the Administrative Conference of the United States, or any other relevant agency, and the Administrator of OIRA may solicit input, from time to time, from representatives of business, nongovernmental organizations, and the public.

(e) The Working Group shall develop and issue guidelines on the applicability and implementation of sections 2 through 4 of this order.

(f) For purposes of this order, the Working Group shall operate by consensus.

Sec3Responsibilities of Federal Agencies. To the extent permitted by law, and consistent with the principles and requirements of Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866, each agency shall:

(a) if required to submit a Regulatory Plan pursuant to Executive Order 12866, include in that plan a summary of its international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulations, with an explanation of how these activities advance the purposes of Executive Order 13563 and this order;

(b) ensure that significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts are designated as such in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, on RegInfo.gov, and on Regulations.gov;

(c) in selecting which regulations to include in its retrospective review plan, as required by Executive Order 13563, consider:

(i) reforms to existing significant regulations that address unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements between the United States and its major trading partners, consistent with section 1 of this order, when stakeholders provide adequate information to the agency establishing that the differences are unnecessary; and

(ii) such reforms in other circumstances as the agency deems appropriate; and

(d) for significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts, consider, to the extent feasible, appropriate, and consistent with law, any regulatory approaches by a foreign government that the United States has agreed to consider under a regulatory cooperation council work plan.

Sec. 4Definitions. For purposes of this order:

(a) “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).

(b) “International impact” is a direct effect that a proposed or final regulation is expected to have on international trade and investment, or that otherwise may be of significant interest to the trading partners of the United States.

(c) “International regulatory cooperation” refers to a bilateral, regional, or multilateral process, other than processes that are covered by section 6(a)(ii), (iii), and (v) of this order, in which national governments engage in various forms of collaboration and communication with respect to regulations, in particular a process that is reasonably anticipated to lead to the development of significant regulations.

(d) “Regulation” shall have the same meaning as “regulation” or “rule” in section 3(d) of Executive Order 12866.

(e) “Significant regulation” is a proposed or final regulation that constitutes a significant regulatory action.

(f) “Significant regulatory action” shall have the same meaning as in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.

Sec5Independent Agencies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order.

Sec6General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof;

(ii) the coordination and development of international trade policy and negotiations pursuant to section 411 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2451) and section 141 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2171);

(iii) international trade activities undertaken pursuant to section 3 of the Act of February 14, 1903 (15 U.S.C. 1512), subtitle C of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988, as amended (15 U.S.C. 4721 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2171 note);

(iv) the authorization process for the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements pursuant to 1 U.S.C. 112b(c) and its implementing regulations (22 C.F.R. 181.4) and implementing procedures (11 FAM 720);

(v) activities in connection with subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31 of the United States Code, title 26 of the United States Code, or Public Law 111-203 and other laws relating to financial regulation; or

(vi) the functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

 


Rise of the Global Police State

05/01/2012

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/04/rise-of-global-police-state.html

Susanne Posel, Contributor
The data being collected by the NSA, FBI and DHS is being converted to technological weapons against the American public. This surveillance will undoubtedly be used as criminal evidence for trial.

The inception of the NSA-GCHQ ECHELON system with the immensely profitable Surveillance Industrial Complex has become a technologically advanced interception system, as journalist Nicky Hager predicted in 1996.

ECHELON was designed to extract massive amounts of data indiscriminately. A covert system of interception facilities was built to spy on the world’s satellites, international telecommunication, and radio communications. ECHELON was the link between all these and provided the US government with high-tech surveillance capabilities for its time.

Whether blanket spying or eavesdropping, the intelligence community could sit back covertly and mine for data without detection.

According to James Bamford 

the Pentagon is attempting to expand its worldwide communications network, known as the Global Information Grid, to handle yottabytes (10 to the 24th bytes) of data. (A yottabyte is a septillion bytes–so large that no one has yet coined a term for the next higher magnitude.) . . . It needs that capacity because, according to a recent report by Cisco, global Internet traffic will quadruple from 2010 to 2015 . . . reaching 966 exabytes per year. (A million exabytes equal a yottabyte.) … Thus, the NSA’s need for a 1-million-square-foot data storehouse. Should the agency ever fill the Utah center with a yottabyte of information, it would be equal to about 500 quintillion (500,000,000,000,000,000,000) pages of text.
William Binney, former NSA official and whistleblower, stated that, “Actually, I think the surveillance has increased. In fact, I would suggest that they’ve assembled on the order of 20 trillion transactions about U.S. citizens with other U.S. citizens.”

The TSA , it has been revealed, has total control over “jurisdiction over all forms of mass transit.”

Samuel Huntington spoke of the coming technological surveillance state where he states that the Western global Elite have responded to the excess of democracy with technological enhancements.

While austerity threatens to further enslave the masses with debt they do not owe and the Elite are investing in the corporatism that is bubbling to the surface, a police state is manifesting under their illegitimate rule.

The attitude of government is to spy on its citizens without accountability and restraint.
The US government has been hard at work shredding the US Constitution.

The UK’s parliament has been passing “anti-social” restraints to force their people into submission.
France, Spain and other EU countries are under direct rule of technocratic bankers who were not elected, but placed into power.

Corporations like Microsoft, Apple, Google and Facebook have given their information over to the DHS and NSA while claiming they are not.
Local law enforcement has been working with cellular phone corporations to survey Americans without cause or warrant.
These are the calling cards of a police state even Orwell could not have imagined.
And we are experiencing this reality now . . . with no end in sight.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

I find it very disturbing that nothing is being said about, Where are all of these traitors coming from that accept these jobs? Has America raised their own brutish enemies? Do we have millions of people haters competing for these jobs, and if so, why? I would not accept a job anywhere within Home Land Security if they offered me ten ovulating twenty-year-old hotties, and a million bucks a year.