THOUGHT MUST PRECEDE ACTION PART 1, 2, AND 3

06/23/2013

3-7-2013 1-48-29 PM

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

For those who have the intelligence, and courage to read this essay, I commend you, and ask you once again to take an active participation in educating our woefully cognitive dissonant citizens by sending this article to everyone you know. Then, get your house in order, and prepare for the worst, for it is surely coming soon. If I were a rich man, I would be offering a bounty. Thank God there is one man in America who can elucidate the full extent of the problem we have.  Dr. Vieira, I salute you.

 THOUGHT MUST PRECEDE ACTION

PART 1, 2, AND 3

 http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin255.htm

By Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.

NewsWithViews.com

Recently, Mr. J.B. Williams published a commentary on NewsWithViews entitled “Can Obama Be Impeached?” Normally, I would not interject myself into matters other commentators address; but, in this case, Mr. Williams saw fit to refer to me by name, which prompts this response.

Mr. Williams’ contention is “that [Barack] Obama can only be removed from [the] office [of President of the United States] via impeachment”. Mr. Williams concedes that this position is controversial. But then he opines that “[w]ho is right in the debate [about whether Mr. Obama can be impeached] is much less important than reaching an actionable position of agreement. The endless debate on the subject only leaves all concerned citizens paralyzed by confusion and lack of coherent direction in how to solve the crisis.” Confronted by this rather amazing assertion, one is compelled to ask whether “concerned citizens” should ever agree to do what is (or at least may very well be) wrong simply because they experience difficulty in determining what is right? Can what is wrong become right because of some arbitrary agreement induced by sloth? Would not determining what is right terminate “endless debate” and remove the present “confusion and lack of coherent direction in how to solve the crisis”? But these questions answer themselves.

1. The first step in determining what is right in this case is to define the problem accurately. Mr. Williams says that he “agree[s] with the claim that Barack Hussein Obama (aka Barry Soetoro) gained access to the Office of President via massive fraud, including identity fraud, campaign finance fraud, just for starters”. That, however, is not really “the claim” at issue here. The actual charge is that, although Mr. Obama may have succeeded in gaining physical access to the office-space a legitimate President of the United States occupies in the White House, he never acquired legal access to “the Office of President”, because, not being “a natural born Citizen”, he was never constitutionally eligible, and is not now eligible, for that “Office”. For Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the Constitution declares (in pertinent part) that “[n]o Person except a natural born Citizen * * * shall be eligible to the Office of President”. If words have any meaning, a “Person” whom the supreme law of the land declares not to be “eligible to the Office of President” can never “gain access to” that “Office” in the sense of legally holding it or asserting any claim to it. The question then becomes, can an individual who is not legally in that “Office” at all, because he is and always has been ineligible for it, be removed by impeachment and conviction from his non-existent position? (I shall leave aside whether Mr. Obama is actually not “a natural born Citizen”. If he were, he could and should establish that fact, which for some unfathomable reason he has so far refused to substantiate in any satisfactory manner. In the absence of proof on that score from the party in the best position to provide such proof, for the purposes of this commentary I shall assume to be valid the assertion that Mr. Obama is not “a natural born Citizen”.)

2. In support of his position, Mr. Williams marshals some quotations from James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Joseph Story. These, however, are quite beside the point, because each of them assumes that the party subject to impeachment is in fact and law actually the President or some other officer of the United States. Not one of them addresses the situation in which some individual, although wholly “[in]eligible to the Office of President”, nonetheless pretends to hold that “Office”.

3. Analysis must begin (and, as will become apparent, also end) with the actual pertinent words of the Constitution material to impeachment and related matters:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 4. No Person except a natural born Citizen * * * shall be eligible to the Office of President * * * .

Article II, Section 1, Clause 7. Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Article II, Section 4. The President * * * shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Article I, Section 3, Clause 7. Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5. In Case of the Removal of the President from Office * * * the Same shall devolve on the Vice President * * * .

Plainly enough, the last three of these provisions refer tolegal “removal” from a status (“the Office of President”), not physical removal from a place, and therefore apply only to an individual who as a matter of law is actually in that “Office” as “the President”, having first satisfied all of the constitutional prerequisites for that status. These provisions do not say (as they might have said, if Mr. Williams’ position were correct) that “an individual who claims to be the President”, or “an individual whom many people believe to bethe President”, “shall be removed from Office”—for the self-evident reason that an individual who is not legitimately inthat (or any other) “Office” at the relevant time cannot be removed from it, no matter what his claims or the beliefs of others may be.

An individual who is not “a natural born Citizen”, and therefore is constitutionally ineligible in principle for “the Office of President”, can never assume the status of “President” legally. The most obvious and consequential practical reason is that such an individual cannot possibly take the necessary “Oath or Affirmation” which is a prerequisite to his “enter[ing] on the Execution of [the] Office [of President]”, because he knows that, being ineligible for that “Office”, he cannot possibly “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”. First, his imposture as “President” itself constitutes an affront to the Constitution—that is, his “tak[ing] the * * * Oath or Affirmation” is in and of itself a violation of the “Oath or Affirmation”. Second, not being eligible for “the Office of President”, he cannot ever legally fulfill the duty of the President, set out in Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. Were he legally capable of fulfilling that duty, and desirous of doing so, his very first step would have to be to turn himself in or order his own arrest as an imposter, thus refuting his own prior claim to be “President”.

One might describe this situation as involving “the principle of constitutional noncontradiction”. Both logically and legally the Constitution cannot demand as the condition sine qua non of eligibility for “the Office of President” that an individual be “a natural born Citizen”, on the one hand, but then, on the other hand, license an individual who is not “a natural born Citizen” to “enter on the Execution of [that] Office”. Similarly, both logically and legally the Constitution cannot deny “the Office of President” to an individual who is not “a natural born Citizen”, on the one hand, but then, on the other hand, require that such an individual who merely pretends to be the President must be “removed * * * on Impeachment” from an “Office” he could never possibly hold. Conversely, both logically and legally the Constitution cannot provide for “remov[al] from Office on Impeachment” of an individual who, being ineligible for that “Office” in the first place because he is not “a natural born Citizen”, never entered or could have entered it—for if that individual must be “removed from Office on Impeachment”, he must in some sense be legitimately in that “Office”, which would mean that his putative ineligibility was not an ineligibility at all, but instead a mere irrelevance.

To reduce this matter to “Dick and Jane” terms, assume that Mr. Williams postures as “the President of the United States”. He leases a large mansion, which he names “the White House”, and in which he sets aside a room he calls “the Oval Office”. From there, he issues executive orders, national-security directives, and other Diktats in the name of “the President”. He surrounds himself with a large Praetorian Guard of deluded myrmidons which he calls his “SS” (after the “Secret Service”). These jack-booted thugs then go about the country harassing people who challenge Mr. Williams’ eligibility to be “the President”. For reasons that are not clear, actual public officials in the General Government and in some of the States in significant numbers choose to obey Mr. Williams’ edicts and to treat him as “the President”. And great masses of “true believers” among the general public lend their fanatical support to Mr. Williams, too. Under these conditions, is Mr. Williams “the President”? Obviously not. How can this situation be corrected? Can Mr. Williams be impeached? Must Mr. Williams be impeached before any other remedy, such as arrest and trial, can be had? Well, no one in his right mind—including, I submit, Mr. Williams himself—would contend with a straight face that Mr. Williams was even capable of being impeached, let alone that he had to be impeached in order to suppress his imposture. What is the difference, then, between the real Mr. Obama (as we are assuming him to bearguendo) and the hypothesized Mr. Williams? That Mr. Obama twice stood for election to an office for which he was constitutionally ineligible? That Mr. Obama received large numbers of votes that had no legal effect, because they were cast for an ineligible candidate? That Mr. Obama twice took an “Oath or Affirmation” of “Office” that he was legally incapable, not merely of fulfilling, but even of taking in the first place? That Mr. Obama now physically resides in the real “White House”? Each of these distinctions between Mr. Obama’s case and Mr. Williams’ simply renders Mr. Obama’s position worse than Mr. Williams’, because the number of counts of fraud in the imposture are multiplied by several orders of magnitude.

Therefore, contrary to Mr. Williams’ conclusion, impeachment is not “the proper remedy to the crisis known as Obama”.

Nonetheless, it is barely possible that, although Mr. Williams is wrong in principle, he may be partially right in practice, in the same way a stopped clock accidentally tells the correct time twice a day. After all, if a bill of impeachment were introduced in the House of Representatives, Mr. Obama’s counsel would have only two choices: (i) to concede that impeachment is a proper remedy for the charge levied against Mr. Obama, while denying that Mr. Obama is in fact not “a natural born Citizen”—in which event that issue would be left wide open to a complete investigation in the House; or (ii) to deny that impeachment is a proper remedy precisely because Mr. Obama’s accusers claim him to be other than “a natural born Citizen”, while hoping that in no other forum could or would that at least tacit admission of his possible ineligibility be used against him. In addition, the intensive legislative debate, and perhaps extensive hearings, that would surely follow in the wake of whichever of these pleas Mr. Obama’s counsel launched would likely generate a tsunami of public interest in the matter. And who can say on what shore that wave would finally break?

 THOUGHT MUST PRECEDE ACTION

PART 2 of 3

http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin256.htm

In any event, even if Mr. Williams is not completely wrong to assert that “Obama can only be removed from office via impeachment”, it would still be advisable to inquire as to whether any other remedy may be available.

4. Criminal prosecution would appear to be the obvious first choice. For example, Title 18, United States Code, Section 912 provides that “[w]hoever falsely assumes or pretends to be an officer * * * acting under the authority of the United States * * * , and acts as such, or in such pretended character demands or obtains any money, paper, document, or thing of value, shall be fined * * * or imprisoned not more than three years, or both”. Mr. Williams, however, asserts that “before any occupant of the Oval Office can be charged with or prosecuted for crimes, they [sic] must first be removed from office via impeachment, so that the business of the people can continue while the individual is being prosecuted for criminal activities”. In support of this contention, he cites a memorandum prepared by lawyers in the Department of Justice, of all people! As an outspoken critic of the General Government—and rightly so—Mr. Williams should have been more discerning. For the Constitution makes it plain as day that no such requirement exists.

The only provision in the Constitution for any immunity with respect to violations of criminal law for any public official while that official remains in office appears in Article I, Section 6, Clause 1: “The Senators and Representatives [in Congress] * * * shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same”. So, Members of Congress may be subjected to “Arrest”—and presumably thereafter tried, convicted, and imprisoned or otherwise punished—on charges of “Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace”, even “during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses”, and even while they are on the very floor of the House or of the Senate, engaged in their official business. Inasmuch as the category “Felony” includes a multitude of crimes, and inasmuch as it is not inconceivable (particularly today) that every Member of Congress might be implicated in some “Felony” or other at the same time, therefore the Constitution allows for the “Arrest” of any Member, and even the entire Membership, of Congress—with no concern whatsoever (in Mr. Williams’ words) that “the business of the people can continue while the[se] individual[s are] being prosecuted for criminal activities”. And this notwithstanding that the Constitution in Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 provides a means equivalent to impeachment, conviction, and removal from office which is applicable to Members of Congress: to wit, that “[e]ach House may * * * , with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member”. Thus, a Member of Congress whose criminal misbehavior comes to light may first be expelled and then subjected to “Arrest”. But he also may first be subjected to “Arrest”, and only thereafter expelled.

In Article II and Article III, the Constitution extends to the President and to the Judiciary not even the limited immunity it grants to Members of Congress, that “[t]hey shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest”. So, on the strength of this silence and the legal principle inclusio unius exclusio alterius, no immunity from “Arrest” (and thereafter from subsequent indictment, prosecution, trial, conviction, and punishment) for any sort of criminal misbehavior exists for a rogue President or any rogue judge.

Inasmuch as Article VI, Clause 3 of the Constitution requires that “[t]he Senators and Representatives [in Congress] * * * , and all executive and judicial Officers * * * of the United States * * * , shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution”, and inasmuch as the Constitution creates only a limited immunity from “Arrest” for Members of Congress and no immunity whatsoever for the President or for any judge, therefore Congress can enact no statute, the President can promulgate no policy (through executive orders or otherwise), and the Judiciary can hand down no opinion that creates, enforces, rules in favor of, recognizes, or otherwise treats as even arguably legitimate any more extensive immunity.

Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 of the Constitution does provide that “[j]udgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law”. This, however, is not because “Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment” of some rogue “Officer” of the United States must only follow his “Impeachment”. The Constitution confines the allowable penalties for “Impeachment” “to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States” in order to preclude Congress from legislating additional punishments, as had theretofore been allowed in “the method of parliamentary impeachment: wherein such penalties, short of death, are inflicted as to the wisdom of the house of peers shall seem proper; consisting usually of banishment, imprisonment, fines, or perpetual disability”. William Blackstone,Commentaries on the Laws of England (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Robert Bell, American Edition, 4 Volumes & Appendix, 1771-1773), Volume 4, at 121. In addition, by appending the qualification that “the Party convicted [upon Impeachment] shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law”, the Constitution deprives that “Party” of the ability to evade criminal liability by interposing a plea of double jeopardy. See U.S. Const. amend. V.

Although no legal reason exists why the criminal prosecution of a rogue “Officer” of the General Government cannot precede his impeachment, conviction, and removal from that “Office”, the practical political problem remains that, if not so removed, the offender might remain in “Office”, perhaps claiming a right to administer it from prison. Impeachment obviates that potential embarrassment. (Of course, the circumstances might be sufficiently serious to requireimmediate action with whatever embarrassments that might entail, rather than accept the consequences of abiding the time-consuming process of impeachment.) Impeachment also deals with the situation in which no actual crime has been perpetrated, but removal from “Office”is nonetheless warranted, because the individual has committed some “high * * * Misdemeanor” of a political nature. See U.S. Const. art. II, § 4. For example, under pre-constitutional English law, “[T]HE first and principal” “high misdemeanor[ ]” was “themal-administration of such high officers, as are in public trust and employment”, of which Blackstone set out a long list, including “preferring the interests of a foreign potentate to those of our own” and “disobedience to any act of parliament, where no particular penalty is assigned” (both of which seem to be endemic in the General Government today). See Commentaries on the Laws of England, Volume 4, at 122-125. Interestingly, although Mr. Williams quite properly quotes Joseph Story as to these types of impeachable “political offenses, growing out of personal misconduct, or gross neglect, or usurpation, or habitual disregard of the public interests”, he does not draw what should be the obvious conclusion.

5. A civil action in the nature of the old common-law writ ofquo warranto (“by what authority”) could also supply a remedy preferable to impeachment for what Mr. Williams denotes as “the crisis known as Obama”. The applicable statute is found in the Code of the District of Columbia, Division II, Title 16, Chapter 35, Subchapter I, Sections 16-3501 through 16-3503, the first section of which provides in pertinent part that “[a] quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises * * * a public office of the United States, civil or military”. By its own terms, this law does not require for its invocation a prior successful impeachment of the “person who * * * usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises * * * a public office of the United States”. Indeed, if that “person” is truly “usurp[ing], intrud[ing] into, or unlawfully hold[ing] or exercis[ing]” such an office, impeachment is supererogatory, because it is logically and legally impossible. It would appear, then, that the existence of this law by itself disproves Mr. Williams’ assertion that “Obama can only be removed from office via impeachment”.

6. So the question remains: Now what? What remedy can Americans hope someone in authority will invoke in order to vindicate their constitutional right to have “a natural born Citizen”—and no one else—in “the Office of President”?

With his usual keen sense for the vicissitudes of practical politics, Mr. Williams observes that “nobody wants to touch this matter with a ten foot pole, because the constitutional crisis created by Obama and the Democrat Party are of monumental proportions. The constitutional line of succession to the Oval Office will not hold in this case as every individual in that line of succession was one way or another, involved and complicit i[n] the most egregious fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.” The mere “constitutional line of succession to the Oval Office”, however, is not the half of it.

(a) Consider the remedy of impeachment. This depends entirely upon Congress. But Congress has already had two separate opportunities, each required by the selfsame statute, in which to address the issue of Mr. Obama’s ineligibility for “the Office of President”—and both times refused, to a man and woman, to take any action whatsoever. As I explained in detail in my NewsWithViews commentary entitled “In the Shadow of Nemesis” (8 December 2008), when Congress convened in 2008 to count the votes for President that had been cast in the Electoral College, only one Representative and one Senator needed to object to a single Elector’s vote for Mr. Obama on the ground of his possible ineligibility for “the Office of President” in order to compel some kind of immediate Congressional inquiry into the matter. Nevertheless, not one Member of Congress did so—even though each one of them could have interposed as many objections as there were Electors’ votes to be tallied. The same result obtained in 2012. Worse yet, many Members of Congress participated in that process in both 2008 and 2012 in the very same deaf, dumb, craven, and feckless manner.

 THOUGHT MUST PRECEDE ACTION

PART 3 of 3

 http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin257.htm

If the entirety of Congress would do nothing to investigate Mr. Obama’s ineligibility in 2008 and 2012—which would have solved the problem at the outset, one way or the other—what percentage in the House will now support his impeachment, and what percentage in the Senate will support his conviction? In the light of this history, does zeropercent seem too pessimistic a prognostication to be plausible?

Moreover, would such cowardly Congressmen dare, at this late date, to wrench open the lid on that Pandora’s Box? Who can possibly estimate how much damage has been done to the body politic by suffering this septic sore to fester for so long? Or how much damage will have to be endured in the future once the infected tissue is finally lanced and the pus drained away? If Mr. Obama is in fact not eligible for “the Office of President” because he is not “a natural born Citizen”, then all of his actions in that pretended status have been null and void ab initio, and now will need to be set aside, with whatever complex, costly, and perhaps calamitous consequences must inevitably follow. For such a disaster, every Member of Congress from 2008 to today would be personally responsible, because each and every one of them has been complicitous in preventing an investigation of Mr. Obama’s reputed ineligibility. Qui potest et debet vetare tacens iubet.

(b) Consider the remedy of a criminal prosecution. Unless Congress were to appoint a special prosecutor, which is as unlikely as impeachment for the same reasons, any criminal investigation would be conducted by Mr. Obama’s own cronies in the Department of Justice. Inasmuch as Attorney General Eric Holder has experienced no crisis of conscience to deter him from supplying absurd legalistic apologies for Mr. Obama’s on-going program of “official assassinations”, he should hardly be expected to shrink from defending Mr. Obama’s eligibility to commit those acts.

(c) Consider the remedy of quo warranto. The statute cited above requires either that the Attorney General of the United States institute a proceeding “on his own motion or on the relation of a third person”, or that if the Attorney General refuses to institute a proceeding the United States District Court for the District of Columbia grant leave for “the interested person” to prosecute a civil action in the name of the United States. Obviously, the present Attorney General will no more institute a proceeding in quo warranto than he will investigate a criminal charge against Mr. Obama. And, having stifled every inquiry by all sorts of plaintiffs into Mr. Obama’s ineligibility to date, the Judiciary can hardly be depended upon to take the initiative—along with the inevitable political heat—now, after immense and possibly irreparable injury has been done to this country, to a large extent because of the Judiciary’s own prior poltroonish defaults.

(d) Consider the remedy of honest public officials’ unwillingness to cooperate with Mr. Obama on the ground of his arguable ineligibility for “the Office of President”. Mr. Obama may reside in pharaonic pomp behind the All-Seeing Eye in the Great Pyramid of Chaos in the Disgrace of Columbia—but he can accomplish nothing whatsoever without the prosaic day-to-day cooperation (or collusion, if you will) of tens of thousands of underlings in the General Government’s civil bureaucracy and Armed Forces. Is it possible to conceive of a tacit rebellion in these ranks, if not inspired by the pangs of conscience then driven by the goad of self-interest—a rebellion which would manifest itself in those underlings’ continued performance of their mundane duties, but their refusal to participate in any constitutionally questionable activity (to use the phrase familiar to any union member, “working to rule”)?

In principle, this is not a possibility so implausible as to be dismissed out of hand, because (as pointed out above) “all executive * * * Officers * * * of the United States * * * shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support th[e] Constitution”—and therefore they should always consult the Constitution before they render blind obedience to anyone, especially an individual who claims to be “the President”, but whose arguable ineligibility for that “Office” has become a matter of national, and even international, notoriety. In practice, though, could any important, let alone large, segment of the contemporary bureaucracy be expected to take this legally scrupulous tack? Unfortunately, no. For here, Mr. Williams is brutally insightful: “The list of usurpations and administration crimes would require an encyclopedia to fully chronicle at this late stage. Recent breaking news of massive violations of American[s’] constitutional rights by nearly every federal agency which Obama has turned against the people of the United States eliminates any possibility that these events are just independent agency coincidences.” That is, the complicity of the bureaucracy is well-nigh complete. And although a few prominent “whistleblowers” can expose the pervasiveness of the rot, they will surely prove insufficient to overcome it.

No more is relief likely to be had at the hands of high-level personages in the Armed Forces. Except when it comes to convening a drumhead court-martial in order to convict an officer with the courage to question Mr. Obama’s eligibility—such as Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin—these people are proving to be “rubber lions” indeed. None of them seems to be capable of discerning the danger, not just to this country but to themselves personally as well, of their remaining under the command of an individual impersonating “the President”—namely, that if such an individual will violate the Constitution with respect to both his eligibility for that “Office” and the veracity of the “Oath or Affirmation” required of him as “the President”, what grotesquely unconstitutional orders will he hand down in his pretended capacity of “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States” in order to maintain his power when he finds himself backed into a corner? This self-inflicted blindness is incredible, because the officer corps’ own self-interest, and even self-preservation, is at stake—inasmuch as Mr. Obama as the Armed Forces’ putative “Commander in Chief” might himself “pull the nuclear trigger”, or order them to pull it, with what devastating consequences can easily be imagined. Moreover, the officer corps’ own self-respect is at stake—inasmuch as Mr. Obama claims as “the President” a license to assassinate people anywhere in the world without any judicial process, and to call upon the Armed Forces to assist him in these homicidal ventures. See my NewsWithViews commentaries entitled “Where Is the Outrage?” (9 April 2012) and “Death Squads” (14 December 2010). Although no one should ever desire an actual revolt within the officer corps—for the simple reason that “government by junta” or even by the threat of a junta orgolpe is utterly incompatible with a free society—one or two well publicized resignations by outspoken officers in high positions would go far towards making “Duty, Honor, Country” more than a mere slogan. Apparently, however, this is too much to expect, if it is not too much to ask.

Inasmuch as Mr. Obama’s policy of “official assassinations” evokes a direct parallel to no less than Adolf Hitler, every thinking American who imagines that the Armed Forces will come to this country’s rescue would do well to peruse, for example, John W. Wheeler-Bennett, The Nemesis of Power: The German Army in Politics 1918-1945 (London, England: Macmillan and Company Limited, 1964). This book sets out some crucial historical lessons that confirm the wisdom of America’s Founding Fathers’ profound distrust of all “standing armies”—namely, that in the long run no country can rely upon professional “standing armies” to preserve its freedom from usurpers and tyrants; but that such establishments can be expected to aid and abet, or at least to countenance, and certainly not to challenge, a central government’s steady accretion, concentration, and ultimately abuse of power.

(e) Consider the remedy of “interposition”, under which rubric the States can reassert the sovereignty they have reserved pursuant to the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. If any situations can justify “interposition”, the usurpation of “the Office of President” by an individual constitutionally ineligible for that “Office” must surely appear near the very top of the list. Nonetheless, the States’ Governors, the States’ legislators, and the States’ judges have done nothing, except to remain silent themselves or to suppress others’ inquiries into the matter.

(f) If all of the foregoing were not depressing enough, Americans find themselves inundated, especially on the Internet, with the strident warnings of lay preachers, divines, and assorted prophets and gurus that this country is fast losing, or even has already irretrievably lost, the decisive spiritual battles to the Demonic Forces of Darkness. Perhaps, then, the necessary remedy is a national exorcism!

(g) Patriotic Americans should remember, though, that it is always darkest before the dawn; that God helps those who help themselves; and that (in the words of Algernon Sidney) “[h]e that has virtue and power to save a people, can never want a right of doing it”—and, one must presume, will always be capable of fashioning some remedy to effectuate that right. What Mr. Williams calls “the crisis known as Obama” goes far beyond a lone individual in the Disgrace of Columbia. And it will not be overcome by the relatively few other individuals in Congress, in the Judiciary, in the General Government’s bureaucracy, in the States’ governments, or in the high commands of the Armed Forces—even if most of them were not consciously complicitous in the crisis or otherwise hopelessly compromised or confused. Instead, America must start what will prove to be an Herculean cleansing of her political stables “from the bottom up”, with her own people wielding the shovels. Not necessarily all of her people. Not necessarily even a majority of her people at first. Rather, America must identify, mobilize, organize, and put into the field those whom the Declaration of Independence denoted “the good People”. The people who desired the Colonies “to be Free and Independent States”, even in the face of resistance from domestic “loyalists” who were willing to support “the present King of Great Britain” in his “history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States”.

The people whom its Preamble identified as having “ordain[ed] and established this Constitution”. And, today, the people who recognize the impossibility of resolving the underlying political, social, and cultural corruptions which have spawned “the crisis known as Obama” through any means less comprehensive than the people’s own direct involvement.

And just what sort of “involvement” is that? I could offer a suggestion—although it would actually not be my own original suggestion, but instead the imperative the Constitution sets out in its most important thirteen words. Rather than supply Mr. Williams with my answer and risk being taken to task by him once again, though, I shall encourage him to search out these words for himself (perhaps in my forthcoming book, Thirteen Words), and report his findings back to the readers of NewsWithViews. When he does, I shall be among the first to agree with him that “[i]t’s time for the debate to end and action to begin”.

© 2013 Edwin Vieira, Jr. – All Rights Reserved

Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).

For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.

He has written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals, and lectured throughout the county. His most recent work on money and banking is the two-volumePieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2002), the most comprehensive study in existence of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective.www.piecesofeight.us

He is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered crash of the Federal Reserve System, and the political upheaval it causes.www.crashmaker.com

His latest book is: “How To Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary” … and Constitutional “Homeland Security,” Volume One, The Nation in Arms…

He can be reached at his new address:
52 Stonegate Court
Front Royal, VA 22630.

E-Mail: Not available 

 10 13 11 flagbar


The Chinese Version of Agenda 21 and Why the US Should Care

06/23/2013

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2013/06/18/the-chinese-version-of-agenda-21-and-why-the-us-should-care/

 PART ONE OF FOUR, ALL HERE

          For graphics and videos, go to the links supplied.

 By Dave Hodges

As most aware people already know, England often provides us with a forward-looking view of where our police state surveillance grid will be in three or four years. The US has a matter canary in the mine from which to predict its future and it has to do with how China are implementing Agenda 21.

China has long led the world in repressive and inhuman enforcement of its one child policies, mandatory sterilization and forced abortions. We also know that China permits corporate slave labor (e.g. Walmart) within its boundaries by globalist corporations. China is indeed a model for the implementation of Agenda 21 and this implementation phase is taking a new and dramatic twist. We in the US, should watch this Agenda 21 canary in the mine because it represents our future.

Agenda 21 Comes to China In Stealth

Agenda 21 is being implemented in China at breakneck speed and the latest phase  and is coming in under stealth and deception.

The Chinese government is in the process of relocating250,000 people per week from rural farmlands to densely populated urban areas into what has been dubbed as the Chinese ghost towns. Many of us have heard about these Chinese ghost cities. However, until this year we didn’t really know the true purpose of why these ghost cities were being built. However, the veil is being lifted and now it is becoming very obvious as to what the Chinese are up to.

China Is Now an Urban Country

China’s urban population has passed the 50% mark, according to China’s Bureau of Statistics. America reached this milestone in 1920, almost a full century before the Chinese and our urbanization was fueled by the demand for cheap labor to fill the new factory jobs. The Communist Chinese regime touts urbanization as the engine behind China’s future economic development. The Chinese propagandists are telling the masses that they must accept relocation from rural to urban because it will fuel the Chinese economy of the future. And what the Chinese propagandists are telling the people is a lie and as with many things in politics, there is the reason and there is the real reason.

Lies and Damn Lies

Although the Chinese government and a select few globalist corporations claim that the Chinese urban population migration is fueled by the need for workers, other Chinese experts tell a different story.

In a Nov. 23, 2011 report, the Beijing Times, one of the most liberal of the Chinese newspapers, quoted  the deputy inspector at China’s National Land Bureau, Gan Zangchun, said that the government land acquisition has created “fake urbanization.” In other words, the Chinese urbanization, based upon economic reasons, is a fraud. Then why is there an urgency on the part of the Chinese government to move its population to urban areas at such a rapid pace and with such inhumanity?

The Real Reasons

For the past few years, people in the West were baffled as to why the Chinese were building massive ghost cities that can house over 1 million people each and yet, these ghost cities were dormant until just recently. The Chinese have over 65 million micro-apartments which lies vacant in these ghost cities.

The urbanization of America took place in proportion to the number of factory jobs which were available well into the industrial period of our history. The American factory jobs enticed future workers to leave the farm and relocate to cities. However, China is taking a “build it and they will come” approach. In other words, the more naive among us are supposed to believe that if the people move into the cities, factory jobs will follow. Stalin tried it as did Pol Pot, and it did not work and what we are really looking at here is a cover story.

More Chinese Experts Debunk the State Propaganda

Chinese political refugee and Princeton University professor, Cheng Xiaonong, stated in that in lots of places in China, farmers are being forcibly relocated at gun point and forced to relocate to urban areas. Cheng said, “[Party chief] Bo Xilai has been promoting a policy of moving farmers into towns, building apartments and moving forcibly relocated farmers into these stack and pack apartments and treating this as urbanization.” Cheng said urbanization isn’t about calculating how many farmers are relocated into cities, but about farmers being able to move into the city and gaining some measure of sustainable employment and adequate living conditions. These relocated farmers, without the prospect of jobs is a recipe for economic and social disaster. Soon, there will be tens of millions of Chinese totally dependent on government handouts to survive. This is the power that governments strive to obtain because it gives them total control. This Chinese scene is reminiscent of the Agenda 21 inspired movie, Hunger Games.

Cheng makes the same observations as many other Chinese experts as he added that “urbanization is generally accompanied by economic growth as was the case in the US. In other countries, urbanization happens naturally, but in mainland China, urbanization is the result of the Chinese regime forcefully pushing farmers off of their land.”

Since the Chinese are not industrialized to the point which would justify the mass movement of 1 million people per month into its ghost towns, any reasonable person would be asking the question, why?

Who Is Behind Chinese Urbanization?

The Chinese government have held many conferences in which they have received consultation from some very disturbing sources, known to most of us as the global elite..

Who could forget Hank Paulson, the former Secretary of the Treasury and the former CEO of Goldman Sachs? Paulson is championing the strategy of forced relocation. In relation to Paulson’s observation and encouragement of Chinese urbanization he states, “The country’s economy is heading in the right direction. This is more important than achieving short-term growth.” Paulson went on to say that the economic growth in China has made urbanization a necessary and proper development. Are you kidding me? We have heard from Chinese experts, both inside and outside the country, who claim that economics is not fueling urban growth. Chinese urban growth is being fueled by bayonets and bullets. Hank Paulson is such a gem. I’m

Hank Paulson

sure you remember Mr. too-big-to-fail, Hank Paulson, when he told Congress that if we, the American taxpayer, did not bail out Wall Street, there would be an economic collapse and we would have martial law and the rest as they say, is history. And bailout after bailout has come and gone and the net effect is that the American economy is in a tailspin. And the Chinese are taking advice from him? That’s like taking advice from Dr. Kevorkian on how to preserve life.

Another key globalist, Dominic Barton, the global managing director of McKinsey & CO, and he too sounds like a Paulson clone as recently stated, “The good news is that there is an underlying force of growth and that’s urbanization. What we’re basically seeing is more we than 250,000 people moving from rural areas to cities every week.”

Maurice strong and George Soros are also players in this mass migration movement. If job demand is not fueling urbanization, then what is?

Getting Down to the Truth

It would seem that key globalists are trying to disguise the real reasons on why the Chinese government is forcibly relocating one million farmers per month to their ghost cities. Ask yourself America, where have we seen the philosophical belief that rural areas should be uninhabited and the population should be herded into densely populated stack and pack cities?

Make no mistake about it, the Chinese with the backing of globalist corporations like Goldman Sachs, are engaged in full-blown Agenda 21 relocation of its civilian population from rural areas to the stack and pack of their mega-cities. From the outside looking in, it looks like a beta test. And there is sufficient evidence to suggest that the same is preparing to happen in the United States.

The Chinese Are Behind a Barrel and They Have Pointed That Barrel On Their People

Why would the Japanese be taking marching orders from Paulson, Strong, Soros and company? The answer is simple, the Chinese government hopes to survive the coming bond collapse in the US which could happen in mere days, weeks or months. The Chinese hold much of our debt in bonds. The Chinese have undoubtedly come to the full realization that their economy will massively implode when American bonds crash.

By moving one million people per month to the ghost cities, the Chinese will find that subjugating their country will be much easier when a martial law crackdown is instituted as necessitated by the coming economic catastrophe. It is also not difficult to speculate that the Chinese have made an under the table deal with the global elite to be the beta test for Agenda 21 style population forced relocation to stave absolute financial ruin.

Thanks to Mayor Bloomberg, the San Francisco City Council, the concept of transition towns, inner city developmental tax breaks for construction and much more, America is following suit with the Chinese style Agenda 21 policies on  many fronts and this is the topic of Part two of this series. And I will give the reader one hint on where this is going, the first area of the US to be relocated will be the Gulf and you can take that to the bank.

 PART TWO

The Forced Depopulation of America’s Rural Areas

 http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2013/06/19/the-forced-depopulation-of-americas-rural-areas/

 Agenda 21 policy calls for dramatically increasing urbanization and forcing indigenous populations out of rural areas and into densely populated stack and pack micro apartments controlled by technocrats with the ability to control every aspect of one’s life. When completed, this lifestyle will be a hell on earth.

In Part One, I detailed how the Chinese government, under the direction of global corporations like Goldman Sachs, is instituting a mass relocation of its population from rural to urban. At the point of a gun, the Chinese military is forcibly removing one million Chinese farmers per month from their rural homes and forcing them into the massive ghost cities from which China has spent nearly $3 trillion to construct.

The Chinese government, Hank Paulson and other globalists falsely claim that the mass relocation of Chinese farmers is necessary to fuel the Chinese economy. Yet, there are no jobs available to these Chinese farmers when they arrive in the ghost cities. Strong industry and the need to fill positions is what drew Americans into the cities during our industrial revolution, not the other way around as the globalists are claiming is the case in China. What we are witnessing in China is the beginning of the implementation of the Agenda 21 creation of massive megacities complete with stack and pack micro apartments.

As in China, there is a decided plot to move American farmers off of their land and into urban areas and this plot commenced nearly two decades ago and is currently picking up momentum. The American and Chinese methods for depopulating rural areas are different, but the net effect is exactly the same.

Can you imagine if the US military, as is happening in China, were to forcibly relocate American farmers to urban areas under the threat of violence from the military? The US  would witness the outbreak of widespread violence. Unlike the Chinese farmers who are being forced by gunpoint off of their land. American farmers are being nudged off of their land by market forces created by covert government policy.

When both countries achieve virtual depopulation of the rural areas of their respective countries, only the government subsidized corporate farms will remain. Local communities and their individual citizens will lose total control over all food and this is a prescription for disaster.

“I will determine what and how much you may drink”- Mayor Bloomberg

If you wonder why New York City Mayor Bloomberg and Michelle Obama have been trying to control the size of sodas, the amount of salt one can use and are dictating what school children will eat for lunch, the answer is that they are conditioning the American public that the government controls all food intake. The reasons for these new controls over diet will become painfully clear after reading the following paragraphs.

Rural Flight In the United States

I know that this will come as a shock to many reading this article because they did not learn of these events from FOX or CNN. However, in actuality, the process of moving the United States towards a complete Agenda 21 style of total urbanization has already commenced and it began nearly 20 years ago.

In 1994, the US became official participants in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which was a ‘liberalized’ trade agreement between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. Under NAFTA, farmers’ income in all three countries has plummeted and millions of small farmers have lost their land, while agribusiness corporations (i.e. large government subsidized corporate farms) have reaped huge profits.

NAFTA has had three dramatic effects on farmers in North America and all three effects further the cause dense urbanization as outlined in Agenda 21 documents.

The Roots of Illegal Immigration

The first notable effect of NAFTA is that it immediately bankrupted over three million farmers in northern Mexico and this group became the vanguard of millions of Mexicans illegally entering the US in search for subsistence work of any type.

Depopulating Rural Areas By Bankrupting US Farmers

The second dramatic impact of NAFTA lies in the fact that it has had catastrophic consequences for US farmers as a record number of small farmers have lost their farms and have gone through foreclosure while the government subsidized corporate farms have thrived.Since NAFTA,the average annual growth of the US trade deficit has been 45% higher.Since NAFTA took effect, about 170,000 small family farms have gone bankrupt which represents a decline of 21% of family farms in the US. The 21% of America small farmers who have been bankrupted since the advent of NAFTA, represents a higher percentage of displaced American farmers than what is happening with forced relocation of Chinese farmers to the ghost cities.And what happens to American small farmers who have lost their livelihood? They either work on their former competitors corporate farms as hired hands, or they relocate to urban areas in search of employment.

American Farmers: Death By a Thousand Cuts

If it is not the EPA enforcing its Agenda 21 wetlands regulations with devastating consequences on farmers, it is the FDA harassing farmers for pursuing time-honored farm related industries such as the raw milk industry. Congress is plotting new attacks on the US farmer as I write these words. Even Amish farmers have felt the wrath of the federal government. Average, everyday Americans are being arrested for merely growing their own food.

Whether it is China or the US, Agenda 21 urbanization policies are designed for the purpose of herding people into dense urban areas for reasons of control and the primary method of control has to do with controlling food production.

The US Government Is Gaining Control Over All Food

The Chinese government is working towards to the control over all food in order to control the people. On an ever increasing basis, NAFTA is providing the US government with the exact same ability. Therefore, the third draconian impact of NAFTA is that it has led to even more nefarious free trade agreements which led to the loss of control for local communities over its own food supply.

Underlying the World Trade Organization, the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and the Central American Free Trade Agreement is the philosophy that all food (i.e. from basic grains, meat, fruits and vegetables) should be exclusively produced for international export. This is a drastic departure from the time honored practice where each country produced the majority of food its citizens needed on local, small farms and only traded in certain products that could not be successfully grown locally. If anyone wonders where this is headed, we only have to look to Africa for the answer. The very first great wave of a NAFTA style of globalization in agriculture took place in Africa, Asia, and Latin America as global corporations forced local farmers to give up local food production, and shifted production to plantations using enslaved Indigenous and African labor to grow the luxury crops of coffee, sugar, bananas, and cocoa for export to the colonizing countries.

The lesson here is, if the government controls the food, the government controls the people.

Starvation Will Be Used to Enforce the Agenda 21 Depopulation of Rural Areas

The use of food by the U.S. government has been a matter of official U.S. governmental covert policy since 1974-1975.

In December, 1974, National Security Council directed by Henry Kissinger completed a classified study entitled, “National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” The study was based upon the unproven claims that population growth in Lesser Developed Countries (LDC) constituted a serious risk to America’s national security.

In November 1975 President Ford, based upon the tenets of NSSM 200 outlined a classified plan to forcibly reduce population growth in LDC countries through birth control, war and famine. Ford’s new national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, in conjunction with CIA  Director, George H. W. Bush, were tasked with implementing the plan and the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, and agriculture assisted in the implementation of these insane genocidal plans.

NSSM 200 formally raised the question, “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? … Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can’t/won’t control their population growth?” Kissinger has answered these questions when he stated that he was predicting a series of contrived famines, created by mandatory programs and this would make exclusive reliance on birth control programs unnecessary in this modern day application of eugenics in a scheme that would allow Henry to have his cake and eat it too in that the world would finally be rid of the “useless eaters!”

Third world population control, using food as one of the primary weapons, has long been a matter of official covert national policy and a portion of President Obama’s Executive Order (EO 13603), National Defense Resources Preparedness is a continuation of that policy. Only now, the intended target are not the LDC’s but, instead, the American people.

With the stroke of his pen, Obama has total and absolute control over all food where his EO states:

e)  “Food resources” means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption.  “Food resources” also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.

(f)  “Food resource facilities” means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer…

NAFTA was merely the opening artillery bombardment against the American farmer and the ultimate depopulation of rural areas. The death of the American farmer will ultimately come at the hands of EO 13603 and I believe this will be fully implemented when Obama declares martial law.

“Thank God That I Do Not Live On a Farm”

2-17-2012 6-27-10 AM

Put this map into your GPS, it will tell where you soon cannot go.

Do you think that you and your family are actually safe from the ravages of depopulating the rural areas through economic blackmail and ultimate starvation? Think again! Unless you presently live in the core inner city and occupy less than 500 square feet of living space, your government, as I write these words, is actively plotting to get you out of the suburbs and into densely populated urban areas and this will be fully exposed in Part three of this series.

PART THREE

Obama’s Plan to Depopulate the Suburbs

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/06/obamas-plan-to-depopulate-suburbs.html

If you live in the suburbs, you might be wise to advise your children on how to live, work and survive in America’s inner cities because that is where they are likely to be living in the near future in a Warsaw ghetto-type of scenario.

The mass migration from the suburbs back into densely populated urban areas is not a next week thing, or a next month thing or even next year proposition, but the groundwork is happening right now. If you are not a Baby Boomer, you will not likely be retiring in the suburbs.

In Part one of this series, I detailed how the Chinese are forcibly relocating one million Chinese per month to the mega-cities that have been dubbed “ghost cities.”

In Part two, I discussed a variety of economic factors intentionally instituted by our government which are designed to bankrupt farmers and force them off their farms and into the cities, leaving the government with their corporate farms to control the entire production of food. Obama will not rest until he has removed every man, woman and child from rural and suburban areas in the United States.

Obama’s Front Man For Suburban Depopulation

The real brains behind the coming Agenda 21-inspired mass migration from the suburbs to the inner cities is Mike Krulig and his new group of community advisers, Building One America.

Most of you have never heard of Krulig or Building One America, and there is a good reason for their anonymity. If a majority of the American people ever discovered Krulig’s true intentions for suburban-dwelling Americans, they would chase him down the street and string him and his people up from the nearest light poles.

The secretive agenda of Building One America has been mostly achieved by Obama’s appointment of like-minded community activists to his staff. In fact, Krulig was one of Obama’s original community organizing mentors from the President’s Chicago Southside days. The word stealth applies because a damning photo depicting Krulig and Obama meeting at the Whitehouse in 2011 appeared on the Building One America website. (The photo is displayed above). However, this type of publicity would not have been good for the swing voters living in America’s suburbs in the 2012 election. Obama’s people had the video scrubbed, as well as the search engine links. However, the Breitbart peopleretained a copy of the picture. This begs the question, if the Building One America plan is so good for America, then why would the Obama people conceal his affiliation with Krulig and his group of Agenda 21 social engineers?

Krulig’s Agenda 21 Building One America group proposes the creation of a regional tax-base sharing revenues in which suburban tax money is directly redistributed to nearby cities and economically depressed concentric zones of inner-ring suburbs. Building One America also seeks to move the poor out of cities by imposing mandatory low-income housing quotas for middle-class suburban developments. Here are the plans of the Building One America proponents (e.g. Senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett).

Krulig’s group also seeks to export the controversial regional tax-base sharing scheme currently in place in the Minneapolis–St. Paul area to the rest of the country. Under this program, a portion of suburban tax money flows into a common regional pot, which is then effectively redistributed to urban, and a few less well-off “inner-ring” suburban, municipalities. The Minneapolis-St. Paul area regional government is run by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats (i.e. Commissars) who are out of control. It is critical to know that removing the election process from this Agenda 21, wealth redistribution endeavor was deliberate for reasons that will become obvious, as the reader will discover.

Don’t Get Too Attached To Your Car

The VMT will get America out of their cars.

Krulig’s group also favors a variety of policies designed to force people out of their cars and force suburbanites, robbed of their own tax money, to relocate into densely populated stack-and-pack cities.

Among Krulig’s strategies to separate people from their cars is the Vehicle Mileage Tax (VMT). Road pricing for the VMT would be implemented to force drivers out their cars. This will impact all drivers except for the Obama-inspired exemption of low-income drivers.

The VMT is designed to give favored status to certain groups. These groups represent organizations that want to transfer wealth through the heavy hand of regional government interfering in the housing, transportation and land use marketplace.

This tyranny is also being beta tested in the (San Francisco) Bay area in a project entitled One Bay Area Plan. One Bay Area Plan is a 25-year plan which combines housing, transportation, and Agenda 21 land use policies. The public cover story is that the project is designed to save the planet by reducing Greenhouse Gasses. The generated revenue, estimated at $15 million per day, would be used to fund further Agenda 21 transportation schemes such as buses, trolleys and light rail in which only a few people presently ride.

Speaking of light rail, I live in Arizona. Arizona has the worst funded schools, mental health and medical care system in the country. Yet, that has not stopped the politicians from spending almost $2 billion dollars to build a light rail system in downtown Phoenix which only encompasses a few miles of usable track in either direction from downtown. And to make bad matters worse, Arizona has approved building an even more expensive light rail system which will connect Phoenix with Tucson. This system will eventually expand to San Diego and Albuquerque.

This plan also calls for Upzoning which would expand the plan to even more areas in the Bay. This would mean even more requirements for high-density housing in cities that do not have their “fair share” of low-income people. This will result in more200-square-foot apartments being constructed near public transit lines. It should be noted that New York City’s Mayor Bloomberg is doing something very similar in which the construction of any new apartment unit over 500 square feet is being forbidden in some neighborhoods.

This Bay Area Agenda 21 plan also contains a concept referred to as the Communities of Concern (i.e. low income and communities of color), which would receive funds from these windfall profits that the region would receive. It appears as if Obama is trying to provoke a race war. Additionally, development fees would be eliminated for affordable housing developments, while subsidies would be used for favored activities such as the creation of more micro apartments and the construction of low-income housing in the suburbs.

“Manhattanizing America”

The Agenda 21 proponents are so brazen that the existence of this scheme has even become part of the mainstream news. The following video contains a Fox News report on the very urban management principles described in the previous paragraphs.

Conclusion

Most people mistakenly believe that the reality of the megacities concept in which we are all herded into the stack-and-pack cities is decades down the road. On the contrary, as you have seen, the program is being beta tested in two large metropolitan areas; and many of Building One America’s collectivist city management principles are presently being implemented right beneath our noses. As long as Americans pay taxes and abide some reasonable community standards, shouldn’t we all be free to live where we choose? Most reasonable people would answer yes, we should be free to choose where we live. However, this is not in the Obama agenda. As will be revealed in subsequent parts of this series, Obama was made President to usher in cap-and-trade and the deindustrialization of the United States. America is truly learning the meaning of fundamentally transforming America, and unless we are able to wake up our fellow citizens, things are about to get a whole lot worse.

In the first three parts of this series, we have witnessed the ongoing depopulation of both America’s rural and suburban areas. However, there is a much more dire scenario brewing. It is becoming clear that the globalists are planning to dramatically and rapidly depopulate an entire region of the country which will impact tens of millions of people, and that plan is already well underway. This will be the subject of the fourth part in this series.

PART FOUR

Depopulating An Entire Region of the Country

 http://www.activistpost.com/2013/06/depopulating-entire-region-of-country.html

In the first three parts of this series, it was demonstrated that both the US government and the Chinese government are engaged in an Agenda 21 motivated plot to relocate rural and suburban residents to more densely populated urban centers to live in overcrowded conditions where a person’s every movement and every activity is monitored. The previously described policies are proving effective in moving populations into densely populated urban centers in accordance with Agenda 21 policy. However, the process is not as speedy as the globalists had hoped. The global elite needed a game-changing event in the United States. In order to speed things up, the elite bankers at Goldman Sachs masterminded the Gulf oil spill to this end.
The Gulf Oil Spill Is a Depopulation Event of Epic Proportions

In order to demonstrate the fact that the BP event was indeed a planned event and is part of a bigger scheme to depopulate the Gulf of its 40 million residents, it is necessary to present a review of the money trail in the Gulf which shows forethought, planning and motive as a precursor to more important reasons on why the Gulf had to be destroyed.

Follow the Money…

When I first investigated the Gulf in a seven part series, I believed I was looking at an event that was motivated by pure greed. Although the major players (e.g. BP, Transocean, Halliburton, Goldman Sachs) did make huge sums of money from this planned catastrophe, I have since discovered the event was not just perpetrated for purposes of greed alone.

The net effect of the Gulf event is that it is a depopulation event, and the government is in league with perpetrators of this event to achieve this end.
It is not just possible to demonstrate that the Gulf oil explosion was a planned event, it is possible to pinpoint the date when the wheels were put into motion which would make it nearly impossible for any investigation to get to the bottom of the event by American authorities. The subsequent cover-up for this event began in 2007, three years before the event, as Goldman Sachs reorganized Transocean, the owner of the destroyed oil rig, into aCayman Island corporation. In doing so, it made Transocean virtually impossible for Congress to investigate and subsequently discipline the perpetrators.

Unashamedly, Goldman Sachs and Transocean instituted a “put option” on Transocean’s stock for Transocean insiders the very morning of the explosion. Transocean boldly walked away with a$270 million dollar profit immediately following the explosion because they had doubly indemnified the rig only weeks prior to the explosion through Lloyds of London. This alone should have been enough to trigger a massive investigation.

Within three weeks prior to the oil rig explosion, Goldman Sachs dumped the lion’s share of their BP stock. Just another coincidence, you say? Then explain why BP CEO Tony Haywardsold 40% of his BP holdings in the weeks prior to the spill and paid off his mortgage on his estate in Kent, England, avoided staggering losses. And true to form involving the pattern of perpetuating a false flag event with media complicity, on June 8, 2010, less than six weeks following the oil spill, BP bought Google and Yahoo Search Terms related to the oil spill in an obvious attempt to conceal as much of the truth as possible from the public.

There are yet more financial coincidences. At the time of the oil rig explosion, Halliburton was drilling at the base of the Deepwater Horizon. Very coincidentally, only 11 days before, on April 9, 2010, Halliburton purchased Boots and Coots for a quarter of a billion dollars. Just who is Boots and Coots? Coincidentally, they are the largest oil clean-up firm in the world. And when the explosion took place 11 days later, wasn’t it fortunate that Halliburton was there armed with Boots and Coots as they capitalized on their timely good fortune. Subsequently, Halliburton’s profits increased 83% in just 3 months following the Gulf Oil Crisissubsequent to the clean-up efforts. It was simply raining coincidences!

The top five dumping institutions of BP stock just prior to the spill included Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P. (-4,680,822), Wachovia Bank National Association (-2,667,419) and it is important to note that Wachovia is a subsidiary of Goldman Sachs, thus, making this one tight little family of co-conspirators. We also see massive dumping of Sanders Capital, LLC (-1,371,785) and PNC Bank, National Association (-1,177,413), which brings noted globalist George Soros into the conspiracy as well.
Obama Identified As a Profiteering Co-Conspirator

The late Bob Chapman, while appearing the Alex Jones Show in June of 2010, revealed that Obama’s only asset holder, Vanguard I and Vanguard II, dramatically sold off BP stock only few weeks before the Gulf oil explosion. Chapman also revealed that “According to this FSB report the largest seller of BP stock in the weeks before this disaster occurred was the American investment company known as Vanguard who through two of their financial arms (Vanguard Windsor II Investor and Vanguard Windsor I Investor) unloaded over 1.5 million shares of BP stocksaving their investors hundreds of millions of dollars; chief among them was President Obama. The FSB further estimates in this report that through Obama’s three accounts in the Vanguard 500Index Fund he stands to make another $100 million over the next 10 years as their largest stock holding is in the energy giantExxon Mobil they believe will eventually acquire BP and all of their assets for what will be essentially a “rock bottom” price and which very predictably BP has hired Goldman Sachs to advise them on.”

This complicity on the part of the President explains why EPA director, Lisa Jackson, refused to hold BP’s feet to the fire for using the most deadly and least effective oil dispersant, Corexit. BP and Goldman Sachs hold the controlling interest in Nalco. Nalco is the manufacturer of Corexit. Therefore, BP, Goldman Sachs, Transocean, Halliburton and the President of United States made money on the clean up from the spill. Obama’s participation ties together the link between these rogue corporations and the government.

You now have to ask yourself. When it comes to this event, are you a coincidence theorist or a well-documented conspiracy theorist? More importantly, this event is much more than a financial conspiracy. This conspiracy is more motivated by the desire to depopulate the Gulf Coast.

The Eventual Depopulation of 40 Million Americans From the Gulf

The entire ecosystem of the Gulf has been damaged beyond repair because of the use of the controversial dispersant, Corexit; the people in the Gulf are being exposed to poisoned air, water and food. Much has been made of the clean-up workers from the Exxon Valdez oil spill and their ultimate fate. Most died before reaching the age of 51. Researchers, Wilma Subra and Kim Anderson et al., have detailed how many people in the Gulf cannot expect to live a normal lifespan because of the high rate of cancer causing chemicals found in Gulf subjects’ bloodstreams. This makes the Gulf a depopulation event by definition.

The Army Corps of Engineers have been positioned to engage in a future and direct Gulf depopulation action. According to the Army Corps of Engineers, in 2007 the US governmentallocated $40 billion dollars for a project to depopulate the Gulf Coast region. The Army Corps of Engineers spokesperson and project director, S.I. Rees, downplayed the importance of the $40 billion allocation. However, the funding is available for the express purpose of relocating Gulf residents and was admitted to by Rees on air. The original document which detailed the Corps’ Gulf depopulation project is now classified; it was done so after Jesse Ventura exposed the plan on his show, Conspiracy Theory, on December 10, 2010. If you would like to actually view the cover page and the first page of the document, simply web search Jesse Ventura and the Louisiana Conspiracy video and move the time bar to about 35 minutes.

The Gulf Region Is An Ever-Increasing Armageddon Ripe for Mandatory Evacuation

In addition to imperiling the food supply and destroying the health of the residents, the Gulf disaster is overwhelming the environment and threatens to bring disaster to the southeastern portion of the United States on an unprecedented scale. The holocaust in the Gulf has grown to such proportions that theEuropean Union Times reports issued a grave report which was prepared for President Medvedev by Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources in which the report warns that the BP spill will become the worst environmental catastrophe in all of human history and will bring total destruction to the Eastern half of the North American continent. The environmental damage has spread as far north as Memphis as local residents report toxic rainfall, containing Corexit, is falling on and damaging local farmers’ crops. This report aired over two years ago and was among the first indicators that the evapotranspiration will cycle was impacted by the Deepwater Horizon explosion and the subsequent use of Corexit to “disperse” the spilled oil.

The oil which is still emanating from the seafloor contains about 40% methane, compared with about 5% found in typical oil deposits, said John Kessler, a Texas A&M University oceanographer who is studying the impact of methane from the spill. Kessler et al, in June of 2010, warned the public that methane was not going to dissipate on its own and that it would continue to increase and come ashore with unpredictable results. Merchant Marine expert, Captain Kelly Sweeney, while appearing on The Common Sense Show, on July 10, 2010, made similar predictions in which he stated that he and many of his sources feared catastrophic methane explosions near several coastal cities which could be triggered by the right atmospheric conditions combined with the high levels of highly flammable methane (click here to listen to Hour 1 of this interview).Methane Explosion

There are also massive sinkholes and enormous amounts of escaping methane gas from the Bayou Corne, LA disaster; this area is particularly concerning. Local officials have made repeated references to “powerful underground forces” which are causing the monster sinkholes in the swampland, which has already led to the evacuation of 150 homes and has led to a heated discussion regarding the likelihood of a methane-bubble tsunami from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico BP explosion. Government officials have warned the local leadership that these high levels of methane pose serious risks to health, fire and could even lead to large explosions. Officials have further warned that local residents needed to obey any coming mandatory evacuation orders. There is no defense against leaking methane and this situation is spreading through the salt domes in the region. Methane has been proven to enter structures through foundational cracks, or through sewer traps if the house or office is built on or near landfills. In the case of Louisiana, it can come through salt domes where the oil and the Corexit has been accumulating for three years. Methane gas can also be ingested. Originally thought to be a remote possibility, methane gas can migrate into the natural water reservoirs. Yet, this is exactly what has happened. These precise conditions are serving to impact the drinking water supplies, as well as the safety of area crops, because of the evapotranspirational cycle. This is not a predicted event in Louisiana, it is exactly what is happening right now.

The Gulf is a poisonous powder keg designed to get the people to either die prematurely or to force them out of the Gulf in a mass exodus.

Peter Sutherland: A Person of Strong Interest

Many have asked if there was a central figure who coordinated this conspiracy. To that question, I have to state that I cannot definitively point to one single person. However, if I were an unencumbered investigator and not operating under the umbrella of an agenda, I would want to look closely at a globalist named Peter Sutherland as the possible mastermind.

Peter Sutherland is an insider’s insider. He is on the steering committee of the Bilderberg Group, he is an Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission (2010-present), he was Chairman of the Trilateral Commission (Europe) (2001–2010) and Sutherland was Vice Chairman of the European Round Table of Industrialists(2006–2009). Sutherland was also the former head of the World Trade Organization and the related GATT. Sutherland is the ultimate insider.

More to the point, from 1996-2009, Sutherland was the CEO of BP. In 2009, he resigned from BP and assumed a “non-executive” CEO position with Goldman Sachs, less than a year before the Gulf Event. As if this is not enough to raise eyebrows, here is where Sutherland becomes my primary person of interest in this conspiracy. In 2006, Peter Sutherland was appointed as the special representative (SRSG) on the United Nations International Migration and Development. The UN’s International Migration and Development would be in charge of large-scale population movements if they were to take place in the Gulf region. Remember the $40 billion dollar relocation fund given to the Army Corps of Engineers to evacuate the Gulf? Well, guess who would be in charge? Peter Sutherland would be in charge through his role with the United Nations. Sutherland was and is in the catbird seat to coordinate this entire conspiracy in order to profit from the spill and to depopulate the Gulf. Murderers have been convicted on far less circumstantial evidence. Yet, through all the fake congressional investigations over this event, Sutherland’s name is not listed in the Congressional Registry even one time. Is it even possible that one person sitting in his rural home in Arizona can find this multitude of interrelated facts and a Congress with unlimited investigative resources cannot?

From Regional Depopulation to Continental Depopulation

The Gulf Stream is a strong interlinked component of the Earth’s global network of ocean conveyor currents, which drive the planet’s weather systems. Dr. Gianluigi Zangari echoes many scientists when they express concern over the fact that the Gulf Stream, known as the Loop Current, has all but stopped and has been irreparably damaged by the oil spill. This is why Europe has recorded its two coldest winters in the last two.

The Gulf Loop

For this reason, Zangari’s concern is that should the Loop Current fail to restart, and it has not to date, dire global consequences may ensue as a result of extreme weather changes and many other critical phenomena as the result of a new ice age caused by the loss of the mitigating effect of the Loop Current. Zangari states that the repercussions could trigger widespread droughts, floods, crop failures and subsequent global food shortages as well as a mini ice age in Europe.

As an aside, I have had several of my European students tell me that since 2010, many European schools are teaching their young that Europe could experience an ice age and the inhabitants would be forced to relocate to the Southern Hemisphere, most likely in Africa. I believe I have told you just how this will happen. This would be population migration on a massive scale.

Conclusion

There are a myriad of ways that the Gulf is being rendered uninhabitable; and add to that the fact that economy in the Gulf has been devastated which has forced even more to leave. If the globalists were to do nothing else to the Gulf, in 20 years the Gulf would be unrecognizable. The death curve will surely spike due to the invasive nature of the Corexit poisoning in so many facets of the residents’ lives. However, I am predicting another game-changing event in the Gulf to exacerbate the exodus which is already happening. Some have noted that the sinkhole phenomenon will spread like wildfire and will nudge more people out of the Gulf. Yet, others have suggested that HAARP will be used to ignite methane in the Gulf waters near coastal cities which would force mass evacuations. I do not know what their move is. However, what I do know is that within most of our lifetimes, we will see a mass relocation from the Gulf into urban areas.

There is one variable which is also underlying this entire event that I will leave you with in closing. For reasons that I will reveal in a future article, the Gulf needs to be vacated on the coast to facilitate the new energy business run by Soros, Gore and friends, and it can only happen in an ecological dead zone. In achieving the goals of Agenda 21, the ends always justify the means.

You can help spread awareness about Agenda 21 through the EXPOSE Agenda 21 Activist Post writing contest. $750 in case prizes will be awarded. Contest closes August 1st, 2013. For full details and submission guidelines, please click here:
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/05/writing-contest-expose-agenda-21.html

Dave is an award winning psychology, statistics and research professor, a college basketball coach, a mental health counselor, a political activist and writer who has published dozens of editorials and articles in several publications such asFreedoms PhoenixNews With Views and The Arizona Republic.

10 13 11 flagbar


Stasi In The White House

06/22/2013

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/06/stasi-in-white-house.html

6-22-2013 6-31-55 AM

By Paul Craig Roberts

On June 19, 2013, US President Obama, hoping to raise himself above the developing National Security Agency (NSA) spy scandals, sought to associate himself with two iconic speeches made at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin.
Fifty years ago, President John F. Kennedy pledged: “Ich bin ein Berliner”. In 1987, President Ronald Reagan challenged: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”

Obama’s speech was delivered to a relatively small, specially selected audience of invitees.  Even so, Obama spoke from behind bullet proof glass.

Obama’s speech will go down in history as the most hypocritical of all time. Little wonder that the audience was there by invitation only. A real audience would have hooted Obama out of Berlin.

Perhaps the most hypocritical of all of Obama’s statements was his proposal that the US and Russia reduce their nuclear weapons by one-third.  The entire world, and certainly the Russians, saw through this ploy. The US is currently surrounding Russia with anti-ballistic missiles on Russia’s borders and hopes to leverage this advantage by talking Russia into reducing its weapons, thereby making it easier for Washington to target them.  Obama’s proposal is clearly intended to weaken Russia’s nuclear deterrent and ability to resist US hegemony.

Obama spoke lofty words of peace, while beating the drums of war in Syria and Iran. Witness Obama’s aggressive policies of surrounding Russia with missile bases and establishing new military bases in the Pacific Ocean with which to confront China.

This is the same Obama who promised to close the Guantanamo Torture Prison, but did not;  the same Obama who promised to tell us the purpose for Washington’s decade-long war in Afghanistan, but did not;  the same Obama who promised to end the wars, but started new ones;  the same Obama who said he stood for the US Constitution, but shredded it;  the same Obama who refused to hold the Bush regime accountable for its crimes against law and humanity;  the same Obama who unleashed drones against civilian populations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen;  the same Obama who claimed and exercised power to murder US citizens without due process and who continues the Bush regime’s unconstitutional practice of violating habeas corpus and detaining US citizens indefinitely; the same Obama who promised transparency but runs the most secretive government in US history.

The tyrant’s speech of spectacular hypocrisy elicited from the invited audience applause on 36 occasions.  Like so many others, Germans proved themselves willing to be used for Washington’s propaganda purposes.

Here was Obama, who consistently lies, speaking of “eternal truth.”

Here was Obama, who enabled Wall Street to rob the American and European peoples and who destroyed Americans’ civil liberties and the lives of vast numbers of Iraqis, Afghans, Yemenis, Libyans, Pakistanis, Syrians, and others, speaking of “the yearnings of justice.” Obama equates demands for justice with “terrorism.”

Here was Obama, who has constructed an international spy network and a domestic police state, speaking of “the yearnings for freedom.”

Here was Obama, president of a country that has initiated wars or military action against six countries since 2001 and has three more Muslim countries–Syria, Lebanon, and Iran–in its crosshairs and perhaps several more in Africa, speaking of “the yearnings of peace that burns in the human heat,” but clearly not in Obama’s heart.

Obama has turned America into a surveillance state that has far more in common with Stasi East Germany than with the America of the Kennedy and Reagan eras. Strange, isn’t it, that freedom was gained in East Germany and lost in America.

At the Brandenburg Gate, Obama invoked the pledge of nations to “a Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” but Obama continues to violate human rights both at home and abroad.

Obama has taken hypocrisy to new heights. He has destroyed US civil liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.  In place of a government accountable to law, he has turned law into a weapon in the hands of the government.  He has intimidated a free press and prosecutes whistleblowers who reveal his government’s crimes. He makes no objection when American police brutalize peacefully protesting citizens. His government intercepts and stores in National Security Agency computers every communication of every American and also the private communications of Europeans and Canadians, including the communications of the members of the governments, the better to blackmail those with secrets.  Obama sends in drones or assassins to murder people in countries with which the US is not at war, and his victims on most occasions turn out to be women, children, farmers, and village elders. Obama kept Bradley Manning in solitary confinement for nearly a year assaulting his human dignity in an effort to break him and obtain a false confession. In defiance of the US Constitution, Obama denied Manning a trial for three years. On Obama’s instructions, London denies Julian Assange free passage to his political asylum in Ecuador.  Assange has become a modern-day Cardinal Mindszenty.  [Jozsef Mindszenty was the leader of the Hungarian Catholic Church who sought refuge from Soviet oppression in the US Embassy in Budapest. Denied free passage by the Soviets, the Cardinal lived in the US Embassy for 15 years as a symbol of Soviet oppression.]

This is the Obama who asked at the orchestrated event at the Brandenburg Gate: “Will we live free or in chains? Under governments that uphold our universal rights, or regimes that suppress them? In open societies that respect the sanctity of the individual and our free will, or in closed societies that suffocate the soul?”

When the Berlin Wall came down, the Stasi Spy State that suffocates the soul moved to Washington. The Stasi is alive and well in the Obama regime.

Obama’s speech at the Brandenburg Gate:http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/19/remarks-president-obama-brandenburg-gate-berlin-germany

This article first appeared at Paul Craig Roberts’ new website Institute For Political Economy.  Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His Internet columns have attracted a worldwide following.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Not in my wildest dreams have I considered the possibility that America could be decimated by one man. Let me be clear, he is not the only one doing this to America, as his Masters are really in charge; but he is at the head of the scumbags in D.C. and has the responsibility to initiate his Masters orders. They have groomed him through others all of his life, and prepared him to stick the knife in the heart of America. It is my heartfelt desire to live long enough to see him come under the power of a restored judiciary, and sentenced to hard labor for life. To be ridiculed by the same scumbag media industry he now controls. May the souls of all patriots continue to debase him for all eternity, and may he contact every known disease that has agonized humanity, and may all of his loyal followers have to eat his excrement every day of their life. All of you reading this diatribe can help restore the rule of law in America by supporting Paul Craig Roberts for Present in 2016. He has a proven track-record of Constitutional adherence. He will restore the principals of freedom in America.

10 13 11 flagbar


The Rational Market Myth

06/21/2013

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/06/20/the-rational-market-myth-paul-craig-roberts/

 Armageddon Without Nukes

By Paul Craig Roberts

One of the myths of economics is that markets are rational. Theories are based on this assumption, and the belief that markets are rational fuels the argument against regulation. The market response to the Federal Reserve’s June 19 statement that it will taper off its bond purchases if its forecast comes true is unequivocal proof that markets are irrational.

The Federal Reserve’s statement that it “currently anticipates that it would be appropriate to moderate the monthly pace of purchases [of bonds] later this year” depends on a very big if. The if is the correctness of the Fed’s forecast of moderate economic growth and employment gains.

The Fed has not stopped purchasing $85 billion of bonds each month. So nothing real has changed. Indeed, there was no new information in the Fed’s statement. It has been known for some time that, according to the Fed, its bond purchases will gradually cease.

In response to this repeat of old information, the stock and bond markets sold off in a major way on June 19-20. This market response to the Fed’s statement indicates that the Fed’s forecast is unlikely to come true. Low interest rates and a high stock market are totally dependent on the liquidity that the Fed is injecting by printing $1,000 billion per year. If this liquidity is not injected, what will sustain the markets? If the markets crash and interest rates rise, how can the Fed expect recovery?

In other words, the participants in the stock and bond markets know that the markets are bubbles created by the printing press. There is no real basis for the high stock and bond prices. The prices are an artificial reality created by the printing press. Rational markets would take into account the printing press element and would price stocks and bonds at a much lower level.

Zero real interest rates mean that there are no risks. But how can there be no risk in Treasury bonds when the debt is growing faster than the economy?

Normally, high stock values mean strong profits from strong consumer income growth and retail sales. But we know that there is no growth in real median family income and real retail sales.

I suspect that the reason the Fed made the announcement, which seems to be derailing the Fed’s forecast of recovery on which the announcement depends, is to relieve pressure on the US dollar. For several years the Fed has been printing 1,000 billion new dollars each year. There is no demand for these dollars. So far these dollars have inflated stock and bond prices instead of consumer prices. But the implication for the dollar’s price or exchange value in currency markets is clear. The supply is increasing faster than the demand. If the dollar falters, the Fed would lose control. Rising import prices would soon drive domestic inflation and interest rates far higher than the Fed’s targets.

Washington has succeeded in getting Japan and the EU to print yen and euros in order to eliminate the likelihood of flight to other large currency alternatives to the dollar. Smaller countries have also had to print in order to protect their export markets. With so many countries printing money, the Fed’s statement implying that the US might stop printing makes the dollar look good, and, indeed, the dollar rose on the currency exchange markets.

Having neutralized the alternative currency threat to the dollar, the Fed and its agents, the bullion banks, the banks too big to fail, are still at work against the gold and silver threats to the dollar. Massive short selling of gold began at the beginning of April. Again on June 20 massive shorts of gold were sold at a time of day chosen to maximize the price decline. Only those who intend to drive down the price would sell in this way.

Since QE began, the Fed has deprived retirees of interest income and has forced retirees to spend down their capital in order to pay living expenses. Judging from the initial market response, the Fed’s latest policy announcement is adversely impacting bond, stock and real estate investors, and the manipulation of the bullion markets continues to wreak destruction on wealth stored in the only known safe haven.

How can a recovery happen when the Fed is destroying wealth?

The Fed’s irrational behavior could be seen as rational if the assumption is that the Fed’s intent is not to save the economy but to save the banks. As the Fed is committed to saving the banks “too big to fail,” it is likely that the banks know of the Fed’s announcements in advance. With inside information, the banks know precisely when to short the stock, bond, and bullion markets. The banks make billions from the inside information. The billions made help to restore the banks’ balance sheets.

Guy Lawson’s book, Octopus (2012), shows that front-running on the basis of inside information has always been the source of financial fortunes. In order to save the banks, the Fed now supplies the inside information.

How is this going to play out? I suspect that the recovery, although officially a weak one, does not really exist. However, thanks to statistical artifacts that understate inflation and unemployment and overstate GDP growth, the Fed and the markets think that a recovery of sorts is in process and that the unprecedented money printing by the Fed will succeed in shifting the economy into high gear.

No such thing is likely to happen. Instead, as 2013 progresses, a further downturn will become visible through the orchestrated statistics. This time the Fed will have to get the printed money past the banks and into the economy, and inflation will explode. The dollar will collapse, and import prices–as globalism has turned the US into an import-dependent economy–will turn high inflation into hyperinflation. Disruptions in food and energy deliveries will become widespread, and a depreciated currency will cease to be used as a means of exchange.

I wouldn’t bet my life on this prediction, but I think it is as likely as the Fed’s prediction of a full recovery that allows the Fed to terminate its bond purchases and money printing by June 2014.

Americans, who have been on top of the world since the late 1940s, are not prepared for the adjustments that they are likely to have to make. And neither is their government.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

I CANNOT THINK OF ANY BETTER MAN IN AMERICA, for the office of President of the United States. Petition Paul Craig Roberts for 2016.

10 13 11 flagbar


The Forced Depopulation of Americas Rural Areas

06/20/2013

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/06/the-forced-depopulation-of-americas.html

 By Dave Hodges

Agenda 21 policy calls for dramatically increasing urbanization and forcing indigenous populations out of rural areas and into densely populated stack-and pack micro apartments controlled by technocrats with the ability to control every aspect of one’s life. When completed, this lifestyle will be a hell on earth.
In Part One, I detailed how the Chinese government, under the direction of global corporations like Goldman Sachs, is instituting a mass relocation of its population from rural to urban. At the point of a gun, the Chinese military is forcibly removing one million Chinese farmers per month from their rural homes and forcing them into the massive ghost cities from which China has spent nearly $3 trillion to construct.

The Chinese government, Hank Paulson and other globalists falsely claim that the mass relocation of Chinese farmers is necessary to fuel the Chinese economy. Yet, there are no jobs available to these Chinese farmers when they arrive in the ghost cities. Strong industry and the need to fill positions is what drew Americans into the cities during our industrial revolution, not the other way around as the globalists are claiming is the case in China. What we are witnessing in China is the beginning of the implementation of the Agenda 21 creation of massive megacities complete with stack-and-pack micro apartments.

As in China, there is a decided plot to move American farmers off their land and into urban areas; this plot commenced nearly two decades ago and is currently picking up momentum. The American and Chinese methods for depopulating rural areas are different, but the net effect is exactly the same.

Can you imagine if the US military, as is happening in China, were to forcibly relocate American farmers to urban areas under the threat of violence from the military? The US would witness the outbreak of widespread violence. Unlike the Chinese farmers who are being forced by gunpoint off their land. American farmers are being nudged off their land by market forces created by covert government policy.

When both countries achieve virtual depopulation of the rural areas of their respective countries, only the government subsidized corporate farms will remain. Local communities and their individual citizens will lose total control over all food, which is a prescription for disaster.

I will determine what and how much you may drink – Mayor Bloomberg

If you wonder why New York City Mayor Bloomberg and Michelle Obama have been trying to control the size of sodas, the amount of salt one can use and are dictating what school children will eat for lunch, the answer is that they are conditioning the American public that the government controls all food intake. The reasons for these new controls over diet will become painfully clear after reading the following paragraphs.

Rural Flight In the United States

I know that this will come as a shock to many reading this article because they did not learn of these events from FOX or CNN. However, in actuality, the process of moving the United States towards a complete Agenda 21-style of total urbanization has already commenced, and it began nearly 20 years ago.

In 1994, the US became official participants in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which was a ‘liberalized’ trade agreement between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. Under NAFTA, farmers’ income in all three countries has plummeted and millions of small farmers have lost their land, while agribusiness corporations (i.e. large government subsidized corporate farms) have reaped huge profits.

NAFTA has had three dramatic effects on farmers in North America and all three effects further cause dense urbanization as outlined in Agenda 21 documents.

The Roots of Illegal Immigration

The first notable effect of NAFTA is that it immediately bankrupted over three million farmers in northern Mexico and this group became the vanguard of millions of Mexicans illegally entering the US in search for subsistence work of any type.

Depopulating Rural Areas By Bankrupting US Farmers

The second dramatic impact of NAFTA lies in the fact that it has had catastrophic consequences for US farmers, as a record number of small farmers have lost their farms and have gone through foreclosure while the government subsidized corporate farms have thrived. Since NAFTA, the average annual growth of the US trade deficit has been 45% higher. Since NAFTA took effect, about 170,000 small family farms have gone bankrupt which represents a decline of 21% of family farms in the US. The 21% of America small farmers who have been bankrupted since the advent of NAFTA, represents a higher percentage of displaced American farmers than what is happening with forced relocation of Chinese farmers to the ghost cities. And what happens to American small farmers who have lost their livelihood? They either work on their former competitors’ corporate farms as hired hands, or they relocate to urban areas in search of employment.

American Farmers: Death By a Thousand Cuts

If it is not the EPA enforcing its Agenda 21 wetlands regulations with devastating consequences on farmers, it is the FDA harassing farmers for pursuing time-honored farm-related industries such as the raw milk industry. Congress is plotting new attacks on the US farmer as I write these words. Even Amish farmers have felt the wrath of the federal government. Average, everyday Americans are being arrested for merely growing their own food.

Whether it is China or the US, Agenda 21 urbanization policies are designed for the purpose of herding people into dense urban areas for reasons of control; and the primary method of control has to do with controlling food production.

The US Government Is Gaining Control Over All Food

The Chinese government is working to control all food in order to control the people. On an ever-increasing basis, NAFTA is providing the US government with the exact same ability. Therefore, the third draconian impact of NAFTA is that it has led to even more nefarious free trade agreements which has led to the loss of control for local communities over their own food supply.

Underlying the World Trade Organization, the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and the Central American Free Trade Agreement, is the philosophy that all food (i.e. from basic grains, meat, fruits and vegetables) should be exclusively produced for international export. This is a drastic departure from the time-honored practice where each country produced the majority of food its citizens needed on local, small farms and only traded in certain products that could not be successfully grown locally. If anyone wonders where this is headed, we only have to look to Africa for the answer.

The very first great wave of a NAFTA style of globalization in agriculture took place in Africa, Asia, and Latin America as global corporations forced local farmers to give up local food production, and shifted production to plantations using enslaved Indigenous and African labor to grow the luxury crops of coffee, sugar, bananas, and cocoa for export to the colonizing countries.

The lesson here is, if the government controls the food, the government controls the people.

Starvation Will Be Used to Enforce the Agenda 21 Depopulation of Rural Areas

The use of food by the U.S. government has been a matter of official U.S. governmental covert policy since 1974-1975.

In December, 1974, National Security Council directed by Henry Kissinger completed a classified study entitled, “National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” The study was based upon the unproven claims that population growth in Lesser Developed Countries (LDC) constituted a serious risk to America’s national security.

In November 1975 President Ford, based upon the tenets of NSSM 200 outlined a classified plan to forcibly reduce population growth in LDC countries through birth control, war and famine. Ford’s new national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, in conjunction with CIA Director, George H. W. Bush, were tasked with implementing the plan and the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, and agriculture assisted in the implementation of these insane genocidal plans.

NSSM 200 formally raised the question, “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? … Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can’t/won’t control their population growth?” Kissinger has answered these questions when he stated that he was predicting a series of contrived famines, created by mandatory programs and this would make exclusive reliance on birth control programs unnecessary in this modern day application of eugenics in a scheme that would allow Henry to have his cake and eat it too in that the world would finally be rid of the “useless eaters!”

Third world population control, using food as one of the primary weapons, has long been a matter of official covert national policy and a portion of President Obama’s Executive Order (EO 13603),National Defense Resources Preparedness is a continuation of that policy. Only now, the intended target are not the LDC’s but, instead, the American people.

With the stroke of his pen, Obama has total and absolute control over all food where his EO states:

e) “Food resources” means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. “Food resources” also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.

(f) “Food resource facilities” means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer…

NAFTA was merely the opening artillery bombardment against the American farmer and the ultimate depopulation of rural areas. The death of the American farmer will ultimately come at the hands of EO 13603 and I believe this will be fully implemented when Obama declares martial law.

2-17-2012 6-27-10 AMPut this map into your GPS, it will tell where you soon cannot go.

Do you think that you and your family are actually safe from the ravages of depopulating the rural areas through economic blackmail and ultimate starvation? Think again! Unless you presently live in the core inner city and occupy less than 500 square feet of living space, your government, as I write these words, is actively plotting to get you out of the suburbs and into densely populated urban areas. This will be fully exposed in Part three of this series.

Help educate others about Agenda 21 by entering the Activist Post writing contest — EXPOSE Agenda 21. $750 in cash prizes will be awarded. See here for full details: 
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/05/writing-contest-expose-agenda-21.html

Dave is an award winning psychology, statistics and research professor, a college basketball coach, a mental health counselor, a political activist and writer who has published dozens of editorials and articles in several publications such asFreedoms PhoenixNews With Views and The Arizona Republic.

10 13 11 flagbar


Washington Is Insane

06/18/2013

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/06/17/washington-is-insane-paul-craig-roberts/

By Paul Craig Roberts

In the 21st century the two hundred year-old propaganda that the American people control their government has been completely shattered. Both the Bush and Obama regimes have made it unmistakenly clear that the American people don’t even influence, much less control, the government. As far as Washington is concerned, the people are nothing but chaff in the wind.

Polls demonstrate that 65% of the US population opposes US intervention in Syria. Despite this clear indication of the people’s will, the Obama regime is ramping up a propaganda case for more arming of Washington’s mercenaries sent to overthrow the secular Syrian government and for a “no-fly zone” over Syria, which, if Libya is the example, means US or NATO aircraft attacking the Syrian army on the ground, thus serving as the air force of Washington’s imported mercenaries, euphemistically called “the Syrian rebels.”

Washington declared some time ago that the “red line” that would bring Syria under Washington’s military attack was the Assad government’s use of chemical weapons of mass destruction against Washington’s mercenaries. Once this announcement was made, everyone with a brain immediately knew that Washington would fabricate false intelligence that Assad had used chemical weapons, just as Washington presented to the United Nations the intentional lie via Secretary of State Colin Powell that Saddam Hussein in Iraq had dangerous weapons of mass destruction. Remember National Security Advisor Condi Rice’s image of a “mushroom cloud over American cities?” Propagandistic lies were Washington’s orders of the day.

And they still are. Now Washington has fabricated the false intelligence, and president obama has announced it with a straight face, that Syria’s Assad has used sarin gas on several occasions and that between 100 and 150 “of his own people,” a euphemism for the US supplied foreign mercenaries, have been killed by the weapon of mass destruction.

Think about that for a minute. As unfortunate as is any death from war, is 100-150 deaths “mass destruction?” According to low-ball estimates, the US-sponsored foreign mercenary invasion of Syria has cost 93,000 lives, of which 150 deaths amounts to 0.0016 or sixteen hundredths of one percent.

In other words, 92,850 of the deaths did not cross the “red line.” But 150 did, allegedly.

Yes, I know. Washington’s position makes no sense. But when has it ever made any sense?

Let’s stretch our minds just a tiny bit farther. Assad knows about Washington’s “red line.” It has been repeated over and over in order to create in the minds of the distracted American public that there is a real, valid reason for attacking Syria. Why would Assad use the proscribed weapons of mass destruction in order to kill a measly 100-150 mercenaries when his army is mopping up the US mercenaries without the use of gas and when Assad knows that the use of gas brings in the US military against him?

As the Russian government made clear, Washington’s accusation is not believable. No informed person could possibly believe it. No doubt, many Americans wearing patriotism on their sleeves will fall for Washington’s latest lie, but no one else in the world will. Even Washington’s NATO puppets calling for attacking Syria know that the justification for the attack is a lie. For the NATO puppets, Washington’s money overwhelms integrity, for which the rewards are low.

The Russians certainly know that Washington is lying. The Russian Foreign Minister Larov said: “The [Assad] government, as the opposition is saying openly, is enjoying military success on the ground. The [Assad] regime isn’t driven to the wall. What sense is there for the regime to use chemical arms–especially in such small amounts.”

Larov is a relatively civilized person in the role of Russia’s main diplomat. However, other Russian officials can be more pointed in their dismissal of Washington’s latest blatant lies. Yury Ushakov, an aide to Russian President Putin said: “The Americans tried to present us with information on the use of chemical weapons by the [Assad] regime, but frankly we thought that it was not convincing. We wouldn’t like to invoke references to [the infamous lies of] Secretary of State Powell [at the UN alleging Iraqi WMD], but the facts don’t look convincing in our eyes.” Aleksey Pushkov, the chairman of the Russian Duma’s Foreign Affairs Committee, cut to the chase. “The data about Assad’s use of chemical weapons is fabricated by the same facility that made up the lies about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. Obama is walking George W. Bush’s path.”

Here in America no one will ever hear straight talk like this from the US presstitutes.

Orwellian double-speak is now the language of the United States government. Secretary of State john kerry condemned Assad for harming “peace talks” while the US arms its Syrian mercenaries.

Washington’s double-speak is now obvious to the world. Not only Assad, but also the Russians, Chinese, Iranians, and every US puppet state which includes all of NATO and Japan, are fully aware that Washington is again lying through its teeth. The Russians, Chinese, and Iranians are trying to avoid confrontation with Washington, as war with the modern nuclear weapons would destroy all life on planet earth. What is striking is that despite 24/7 brainwashing by the presstitutes, a large majority of the American population opposes obama’s war on Syria.

This is good news. It means more Americans are developing the ability to think independently of the lies Washington feeds to them.

What the neocon nazis, the bush/obama regime, and the presstitute media have made
clear is that Washington is going to push its agenda of world hegemony to the point of
starting World War III, which, of course, means the end of life on earth.

Russia and China, either one of which can destroy the United States, have learned that the US government is a liar and cannot be trusted. The Libyan “no-fly” policy to which Russia and China agreed turned out to be a NATO air attack on the Libyan army so that the CIA-sponsored mercenaries could prevail.

Russia and China, having learned their lesson, are protesting Washington’s assault on Syria that Washington pretends is a “civil war.” If Syria falls, Russia and China know that Iran is next.

Iran is Russia’s underbelly, and for China Iran is 20% of its energy imports. Both Russian and Chinese governments know that after Iran falls, they are next. There is no other explanation for Washington surrounding Russia with missile bases and surrounding China with naval and air bases.

Both Russia and China are now preparing for the war that they see as inevitable. Washington’s crazed, demented drive for world hegemony is bringing unsuspecting Americans up against two countries with hydrogen bombs whose combined population is five times the US population. In such a conflict everyone dies.

Considering the utterly insane government ruling in Washington, if human life exists in 2020, it will be a miracle. All the worry about future Medicare and Social Security deficits is meaningless. There will be no one here to collect the benefits.

Addendum: If the report below from RT is accurate, it seems obvious that the ignorant and evil denizens of Washington, D.C., are driving the world to World War III. http://rt.com/news/iran-troop-deployment-syria-782/

Addendum: Russia says it will not allow Syria no-fly zones.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article35318.htm

Addendum: Once again Washington demonstrates that it is home to the most stupid people on earth: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-to-send-4000-troops-to-aid-president-assad-forces-in-syria-8660358.html?printService=print

10 13 11 flagbar


Seven amazing uses of hemp

06/17/2013

http://www.naturalnews.com/040771_hemp_legalization_industrial_uses.html#ixzz2WPWywEgF

 By: PF Louis

How did a plant that is so easily cultivated with so many uses since it was first grown in China around 6,000 BC become illegal? Even the original Declaration of Independence was written on hemp paper.
Hemp fiber was used for sails and ropes for sea-going vessels during the 17th and 18th Centuries. Up until the early 20th Century, removing hemp fiber by hand was too tedious and slow for hemp to compete with other industries propelled by the burgeoning machine age.

But as WWI broke out, a German immigrant in California, George Schlichten, invented and successfully tested the first hemp decorticator, which could mechanically strip hemp of its fiber rapidly and efficiently.

Associates of the USA‘s newspaper magnate of that time, EW Scripps, showed some interest in using the decorticator on a 100-acre plot of hemp near San Diego for Scripps’ paper sources. Economic circumstances and the war discouraged their plans. [1]

During the late 1930s, editions of Popular Mechanics and Mechanical Engineering exclaimed hemp could now become a billion dollar industry because of the hemp decorticator, making it seem it was a new invention even though it had been around since 1917.

But those re-emerging headlines may have have motivated industrial and banking giants with connections in Roosevelt’s administration to rid the hemp threat to their interests. This led to the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, the first step in squashing the hemp industry.

Even the AMA was thrown off by this legislation because hemp tinctures and oils had been prescribed for several ailments.

Here’s a summarized story that names the vested interests behind that legislation: http://www.princeton.edu.

Amazing hemp benefits

(1) Medicinal: Medical marijuana or cannabis edibles and THC hemp oils have been studied internationally by reputable labs and clinics for their healing properties, especially regarding cancer, for decades.

According to GreenMedInfo founder Sayer Ji, “Indeed, the GreenMedInfo.com project has uncovered 129 distinct disease categories that may benefit from this remarkable plant thus far, and new studies are being added on a weekly basis.” [2]

Classifying marijuana as a drug without medical merit is a lie perpetuated by the Justice Department’s DEA to keep it illegal for their business of arresting and prosecuting peaceful marijuana users.

Then came a Canadian, Rick Simpson, who cured his Nova Scotia neighbors with his own cannabis or hemp oil (http://www.naturalnews.com/027756_cancer_cure_Big_Pharma.html).

(2) Foods: Hemp seeds and oils are an abundant source of perfectly balanced omega-6, omega-3, and omega-9 fatty acids. The high level of essential protein amino acids hemp offers provides a more bio-available complete protein than most all other protein sources, plant or animal. [3]

(3) Clothing: Cloth from hemp is tougher and allows for better ventilation than even cotton. You can buy hemp clothing today. Legalizing hemp would lower the costs of the imports of hemp fibers.

(4) Plastics: Around 1940, Henry Ford built a “vegetable car” with mostly hemp fibers, not including the drive train of course. The body was so strong two men with sledgehammers and axes couldn’t harm it. [4]

Properly produced hemp plastics are 100 percent biodegradable and can replace all current petroleum based chemically infested plastics. [5]

(5) Building materials: Several types of building materials, stronger and lighter than wood and concrete with better insulation properties have actually been used recently for housing. [2 – video] [5]

(6) Paper: Instead of deforesting for wood to mill paper with harsh chemicals, a process that manifests countless ecological problems, hemp fibers could be used for paper. It had been used for paper before wood pulp processing. And the paper’s quality is considered superior by many.

(7) Agriculture: Hemp is a hardy plant requiring little water and no synthetic fertilizers or herbicides. It’s a perfect rotation crop because it boosts soil health. In a relatively warm temperate climates, it can be planted and harvested twice a year.

Because it’s easy to grow and harvest with less overhead, it’s also a perfect cash crop for struggling small farms. Kentucky senator Rand Paul is pushing for a bill to legalize industrial hemp growth. It’s already happening in Colorado (http://www.naturalnews.com).

Sources for this article include:

Original decorticator historyhttp://www.electricemperor.com/eecdrom/HTML/EMP/02/ECH02_20.HTM

http://www.naturalhealth365.com/food_news/hemp-protein.html

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewcommentary.php?storyid=85

http://www.hemphasis.net/Building/plasticmettle.htm

http://www.naturalnews.com/032904_marijuana_legalization.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/034599_medical_marijuana_juicing_cures.html

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040771_hemp_legalization_industrial_uses.html#ixzz2WPWywEgF

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Once again we encounter the cognitive dissonant American supporting the lies published by the government controlled media industry. If we believe them, the world will be over-run with pot-heads raping and murdering our wives and children. I cannot express in acceptable language how pissed it makes me for my fellow citizens to be stupid enough to believe the media industry’s lies. Legal production of Hemp could turn our Nation’s problem of unemployment around in one year!

AND THAT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IS WHY IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN! TO BE INDEPENDENT OF GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS IS THEIR BIGGEST NIGHTMARE. WHEN ARE AMERICANS GOING TO WAKE UP AND TAKE BACK OUR FREEDOM?

F&$K THE GOVERNMENT!

10 13 11 flagbar