The REAL Terrorists are Exposed: They are the Bankers and the NSA



by Tom Heneghan, International Intelligence Expert

UNITED States of America   –   It can now be reported that the fundraising mechanism for the ISIS crisis actors that are intent on fueling a Shiite-Sunni religious jihad across the Middle East are alleged U.S. allies: the nations of Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia (evidence of Saudi Intelligence involvement in 9/11 continues to be covered up by the U.S. Justice Department and the Obama Administration).

The ISIS leadership is using U.S. Citibank and Mellon Bank of New York as their parking lot for funds laundered and transferred from the aforementioned Middle East nations.

At this hour, it is interesting that the same Mellon Bank of New York remains in the cross hairs involving the $539 million Argentine bond default.

The Argentine default has already escalated and created $5 trillion of cross-collateralized interest rate derivatives (there is no cash just paper I.O.U.s) ready to go hybrid with the Bank of England, Mellon Bank of New York, U.S. Citibank and German Deutsche Bank as the counter parties.

P.S. The geopolitical and financial crisis is now out of control and will force the New World Order (NWO) elite to use their crooked bank-financed “crisis actors” ISIS to stage a 2nd 9/11 FALSE FLAG attack on the American People that will give the NAZI Paperclip elite an excuse to declare a final declaration of MARTIAL LAW on American soil and lead to the final shredding of the U.S. Constitution and our American Republic with the NAZI BushFRAUD era Patriot Act the new law of the land.

Note: The use of the Ebola virus coming out of Africa and now threatening the U.S. population is all part of an NAZI Paperclip NSA trial run aka test – restricted travel is coming soon.

What will follow simultaneously will be a massive “Bail-In” (Cyprus-style) by crooked banks and the U.S. Federal Reserve on all U.S. savings and checking accounts in order to “bail out” the crooked U.S. and worldwide banks that are now completely broke (no cash).

Reference: This is all allowed under crooked legislation called Dodd-Frank.

Item: These series of events to come, of course, have been triggered by the Argentine default.

P.S. At this hour, 4,000 elite special forces of the Russian army (Spetsnaz) have entered east Ukraine and are already staging and scripting for 20,000 Russian troops to cross over into eastern Ukraine. In other words, the Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine is imminent.

P.P.S. Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin has now presented overwhelming evidence to the United Nations of massive NAZI Paperclip NSA genocide against the ethnic Russian population of east Ukraine all ordered directly by the NAZI-controlled Ukrainian government.

Putin has also presented ‘smoking gun’ evidence to the United Nations that the U.S. State Department and Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Valerie Nuland (noodle), along with former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, current U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, and former U.S. NSA Chieftain Michael Hayden and his current employer, The Chertoff Group, staged the illegal violent coup d’ etat and uprising against the previous pro-Russian, duly elected government of the Ukraine on behalf of worldwide financial terrorist George Soros and crooked worldwide banking interests.

Message to neo-con NAZIS in the United States:

You morons clearly took no history in college and do not understand that Russia, after losing 15 million of its citizens in two deadly wars versus French emperor Napoleon and then 30 million citizens in WWII versus sociopath NAZI dictator Adolf Hitler, can never trust the West and will always use, as they have done for 9 centuries, the territory of the Ukraine as their buffer.

Ukraine, for 9 centuries, has always been the bread basket of Russia.

In closing, at this hour we ask the patriotic U.S. Military, all State militias, all county Sheriffs, along with the assistance of our great ally of 200 years, the Republic of France, to rise up together on American soil to stage a 2nd American Revolution in order to restore our Constitution the Supreme Law of our Land, liberate the American People from NAZI Paperclip occupation — it is the only way out!

As Thomas Jefferson so correctly stated “I would rather die as a free man than live as a slave to tyrants and despots”.

WAYNE MADSEN: ABC Nightline, NSA, 10 July 2001 two months before 9/11

NSA’s talking points, 2 months before they received

carte blanche surveillance authority

(FDIC 2009)

Too Big to Fail: The FDIC Went Bankrupt Last Summer. The Financial Media Say Nothing

FDIC & Bank of England Create Resolution authority for Unlimited Cyprus-Style “Bail-Ins” for TBTF Banks!

The joint US/UK resolution states that depositor haircuts are already legal in the

Such a strategy would involve the bail-in (write-down or conversion) of creditors


Vital Intelligence Briefings

There Are NO Terrorists – There NEVER Were Any Terrorists

Banks Remain On The Brink

Black Ops and PsyOps and God Save the Queen

Black Ops and PsyOps 2, Pivot!

PsyOps and Black Ops 3

PsyOps and Black Ops 4

PsyOps and Black Ops and Ponzi Schemes 5

10 13 11 flagbar


Help Preserve Our Independence and Freedom by Stopping the Free Trade Agenda


 By:  Larry Greenley

Whether the intention [of our American leaders] be defined as treason, however, or as merely the implementation of a difference in opinion or political philosophy, the results will include the total surrender of the independence of the United States [and] the loss of all individual freedom on the part of its inhabitants….
For we are at the stage where, unless we are always to let the enemy choose both battlefield and weapons, we must stop merely reacting to what the enemy does. Instead of merely defending ourselves, and harassing the enemy as much as we can while we give ground, we must take the offensive and strike back at points we select. [Emphasis added.]   – Robert Welch, January 1961 JBS Bulletin

At the founding meeting of The John Birch Society in December 1958, Robert Welch stated that the method that the Establishment elites are relying most heavily on for “taking us over” is their plan “to induce the gradual surrender of American sovereignty, piece by piece and step by step, to various international organizations – of which the United Nations is the outstanding but far from the only example.”

Then, a little over two years later, Robert Welch clearly stated in the January 1961 Bulletin (see indented quote above) what is at stake for Americans: “the total surrender of the independence of the United States [and] the loss of all individual freedom on the part of its inhabitants.”

He then proceeded to clearly state what our strategy for preserving our independence and freedom would be: “We must take the offensive and strike back at points we select.”

Based on the above considerations, the JBS has been taking the offensive by striking back at the United Nations since the very early days of the Society in 1959. By 1962 JBS was offering Get US out! envelope stickers to help create awareness of the need for the United States to get out of the United Nations.

Years later in the January 1989 Bulletin, William F. Jasper issued the Society’s first warning about free trade agreements:

Legislation calling for the creation of “free trade zones” must be defeated. Plans to establish such areas will surely blur border distinctions and dilute U.S. sovereignty.

The Society has always distinguished between the classical free trade policy of Adam Smith and the Insider-created “free trade” agreement initiatives, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the present-day Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). While we don’t oppose classical free trade policy, we do oppose the numerous present-day “free trade” agreement initiatives and the economic and political integration of blocs of nations that they are intended to bring about.

While the JBS played a leading role in stalling the development of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and greatly slowing down the development of the North American Union (NAU) during the first decade of the 21st century, we now face new threats to our national independence and personal freedoms from the proposed TPP (involving the eventual economic and political integration of the United States and eleven other Pacific Rim nations) and the TTIP (involving merging the United States and the European Union).

What’s happening is that we’ve reached a new critical stage in the transition of the United States from a free, independent nation to becoming a mere “member state” within a UN world government. While back in the 1990s the U.S. was put on the path to economic and political integration with Canada and Mexico with the NAFTA agreement, now the proposed TTIP would lead to the economic and political integration of the NAU, represented for now by the United States, and the EU, which has already absorbed twenty-eight formerly independent nations in Europe.

The leading feature of this new critical stage is that instead of integrating groups of individual nations, we’re now seeing the integration of blocs of nations. That is, we’re fast approaching the time when regional economic and political blocs of formerly independent nations could be stitched together into a UN world government, thus completing the process that Robert Welch warned us about – “the gradual surrender of American sovereignty, piece by piece and step by step, to various international organizations – of which the United Nations is the outstanding but far from the only example.”

In 2013, JBS leadership chose to “take the offensive and strike back at points we select” by formulating the “Choose Freedom – STOP the Free Trade Agenda” action project to stop congressional approval of the TPP and TTIP partnership agreements. This action project, which is strictly in accordance with Robert Welch’s early warnings and strategy, has been designated one of the top two (along with “STOP the Con-Con”) highest priority JBS Agenda items.

Successfully stopping the TPP and TTIP will be a heavy lift. We’re faced with the enormous task of exposing the sovereignty- and freedom-destroying reality behind the “free trade” façade. We’re faced with having to oppose something that most congressional Republicans and many congressional Democrats support. We’re faced with very little media coverage of the negotiations of the TPP and TTIP agreements, which means that it’s extra hard to get people to focus on these agreements.

What we need is for our members and other conservative leaders and opinion molders to educate themselves and get inspired about the crucial importance of stopping the TPP and TTIP agreements. The best way to get the required depth of knowledge and big picture overview to be effective leaders in this battle is to read the special report of The New American, “How the Free Trade Agenda Is Knocking Down America,” September 2, 2013. This special report is available as a PDF at or (in physical form) from

Next, after educating yourself, we need you and other conservative leaders and opinion molders to provide leadership in informing other Americans about the threat to our national independence and personal freedom posed by the TPP and TTIP agreements. While you’ll understand the threat to our independence and freedom and how these agreements would move us toward a UN world government, many people will be motivated to oppose the TPP and TTIP by fears of job losses. In light of this, our “STOP the Free Trade Agenda” pamphlets feature prominently the job loss aspect of these trade pacts.

Finally, provide leadership in your area to build sufficient grassroots pressure to influence your senators and representative to vote NO on TPA (fast-track), TPP, and TTIP. As of now, it appears that TPA and TPP could possibly be voted on in the lame-duck session that will be held after the November elections, but more likely the votes will come sometime in 2015. A vote on the TTIP could happen later in 2015, but more likely in 2016.

Please contact your senators and representative on these three issues:

We must preserve our national independence and our personal freedoms!


Your Friends at The John Birch Society

P.S. Click here for a listing of educational tools for stopping the free trade agenda.

P.P.S. Click here to view this email as an article at

10 13 11 flagbar

The Pentagons Strategy for World Domination Full Spectrum Dominance from Asia to Africa


 Bruce Gagnon

Current US military space policy is primarily geared toward two countries, China and Russia.

In May 2000 the Washington Post published an article called “For Pentagon, Asia Moving to Forefront.” The article stated that, “The Pentagon is looking at Asia as the most likely arena for future military conflict, or at least competition.” The article said the US would double its military presence in the region and essentially attempt to manage China.

8-28-2014 8-56-29 AM

The Pentagon’s missile system.

The Pentagon has become the primary resource extraction service for corporate capital. Whether it is Caspian Sea oil and natural gas, rare earth minerals found in Africa, Libya’s oil deposits, or Venezuelan oil, the US’s increasingly high-tech military is on the case.

President Obama’s former National Security Adviser, Gen. James Jones had previously served as the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. In 2006, Gen. Jones told the media,

“NATO is developing a special plan to safeguard oil and gas fields in the [Caspian Sea] region…. Our strategic goal is to expand to Eastern Europe and Africa.”

In a past quadrennial National Intelligence Strategy report, former U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair claimed that Russia “may continue to seek avenues for reasserting power and influence in ways that complicate U.S. interests…[and] China competes for the same resources the United States needs, and is in the process of rapidly modernizing its military.”

Using NATO as a military tool, the US is now surrounding Russia and easily dragged the supposedly European-based alliance into the Afghanistan war and Libya attack. The US is turning NATO into a global military alliance, even to be used in the Asian-Pacific region.


In mid-March of 2009 the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency (MDA) held a conference in Washington. At that meeting Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) stated, “Missile defense is an important element of our nation’s defense. For example, it is a high priority to field effective defenses for our forward-deployed forces against the many hundreds of existing short- and medium-range missiles.”

8-28-2014 8-56-52 AM

Patriot missiles.

The Obama administration is currently deploying “missile defense” (MD) systems in Turkey, Romania, Poland and on Navy destroyers entering the Black Sea. The NATO military noose is tightening around Russia.

Russia has the world’s largest deposits of natural gas and significant supplies of oil. The US has recently built military bases in Romania and Bulgaria and will soon be adding more in Albania. NATO has expanded eastward into Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, right on Russia’s border. Georgia, Ukraine, Sweden and Finland are also on the list to become members of the cancerous NATO.

An Indian journalist observes,

“The arc of encirclement of Russia gets strengthened. NATO ties facilitate the [eventual] deployment of the US missile defense system in Georgia. The US aims to have a chain of countries tied to ‘partnerships’ with NATO brought into its missile defense system – stretching from its allies in the Baltic to those in Central Europe. The ultimate objective of this is to neutralize the strategic capability of Russia and China and to establish its nuclear superiority. The National Defense Strategy document, issued by the Pentagon on July 31, 2008, portrays Washington’s perception of a resurgent Russia and a rising China as potential adversaries.”

Just as we have seen the balkanization of Yugoslavia, Libya, and Iraq by US-NATO it appears that the same strategy has been developed for Russia. With NATO’s continuing military encirclement of Russia the plan appears to be to draw Moscow into a military quagmire in Ukraine that will weaken that nation. The Rand Corporation has studies that call for the break-up of Russia into many smaller pieces thus giving western corporations better access to the vast resource base available there.

The recent announcement by BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) that they have created a $100 billion international development bank to rival the IMF and World Bank has angered western corporate controlled governments who don’t want any challenge to their management of the global economy. Directly after the BRICS announcement we witnessed an escalation of the US-NATO funded and directed civil war in Ukraine.

The Harper government is now recommending that Canada join the US missile defense program. Canadian military corporations are itching to open the flood gates to the national treasury – the profits from a junior partnership with the US in an arms race in space are too much to pass up. But first more cuts must be made to the Canadian national health care program and other valuable social welfare programs. In the US the military industrial complex has targeted the “entitlement programs” – Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and what is left of “welfare” for defunding to help pay for the expensive military space technology agenda.

Canada has also undertaken the construction of “armed combat vessels” at the Irving Shipyard in Halifax. This $25 billion program, the largest military appropriation in Canadian history, was supported by every political party in the country. Why does Canada need such a monumental war ship building program?


As ice melts in the Arctic, the US Navy anticipates that it will have to increase its presence in the region to “protect shipping”. Over the past 25 years, the Arctic has seen a 40% reduction in ice as a result of global warming. Maine’s Independent Senator Angus King recently wrote “gas and oil reserves that were previously inaccessible” will soon be available for extraction. Last spring Sen. King took a ride on a US nuclear submarine under the Arctic ice. Also along for the ride was Admiral Jonathan Greenert, the chief of naval operations, who told the New York Times: “We need to be sure that our sensors, weapons and people are proficient in this part of the world,” so that we can “own the undersea domain and get anywhere there.”

8-28-2014 8-57-10 AM

A new Navy report called “US Navy Arctic Roadmap: 2014-2030” states: “Ice in the Arctic has been receding faster than we previously thought…and offers an increase in activity.” The Arctic region holds a plethora of undiscovered fossil fuels and natural resources, including an estimated 90 billion barrels of oil, 1,669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 44 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, the roadmap says.

The report warns that the Navy will face serious logistical challenges and will need to examine ways to distribute fuel in the region to “air and surface platforms”. Operating bases will be needed to host deployed military personnel. Partnerships with nations that border the Arctic and more warships will be needed to ensure that the undersea resources are kept in the hands of US-NATO and away from competitors like Russia.

US Secretary of War Chuck Hagel stated in late 2013 that, “By taking advantage of multilateral training opportunities with partners in the region, we will enhance our cold-weather operational experience, and strengthen our military-to-military ties with other Arctic nations.”


President Obama has in the past called for the abolition of nuclear weapons. The Russians, watching an advancing NATO and MD deployments near their borders, are telling the world that any real hopes for serious nuclear weapons reductions are in jeopardy.

8-28-2014 8-57-32 AM

Russia and China attempt to prohibit space weapons at the United Nations.

Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev delivered the opening address at the “Overcoming Nuclear Dangers” conference in Rome on April 16, 2009. He noted, “Unless we address the need to demilitarize international relations, reduce military budgets, put an end to the creation of new kinds of weapons and prevent weaponization of outer space, all talk about a nuclear-weapon-free world will be just inconsequential rhetoric.”

The entire US military empire is tied together using space technology. With military satellites in space the US can see virtually everything on the Earth, can intercept all communications on the planet, and can target virtually any place at any time. Russia and China understand that the US military goal is to achieve “full spectrum dominance” on behalf of corporate capital.

Using new space technologies to coordinate and direct modern warfare also enables the military industrial complex to reap massive profits as it constructs the architecture for what the aerospace industry claims will be the “largest industrial project” in Earth history.


The deployment of Navy Aegis destroyers in the Asian-Pacific region, with MD interceptors on-board, ostensibly to protect against North Korean missile launches, gives the US greater ability to launch preemptive first-strike attacks on China.

The US now has 30 ground-based MD interceptors deployed in South Korea. Many peace activists there maintain that the ultimate target of these systems is not North Korea, but China and Russia.

8-28-2014 8-57-56 AM

Europe’s leaders are complicit in Full Spectrum Dominance.

The current US military expansion underway in Hawaii, South Korea, Japan, Guam, Okinawa, Taiwan, Australia, Philippines and other Pacific nations is indeed a key strategy in this offensive “pivot” to control China.

An additional US goal is to have the “host” countries make significant contributions toward helping the Pentagon cover the cost of this massively expensive escalation.

For many years the US Space Command has been annually war gaming a first-strike attack on China. Set in the year 2017 the Pentagon first launches the military space plan that flies through the heavens and unleashes a devastating first-strike attack on China’s nuclear forces – part of the new “Global Strike” program.

In the war game China then attempts to launch a retaliatory strike with its tens of nuclear missiles capable of hitting the west coast of the continental US. But US “missile defense” systems, currently deployed in Japan, South Korea, Australia, Guam and Taiwan, help take out China’s disabled nuclear response. 

8-28-2014 8-58-18 AM

Peaceful protestors, Japan.

Obama’s former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ comments were quite revealing in 2009 when he said, “We’re converting more Navy Aegis ships to have ballistic missile defense that would help against China.”

Missile defense, sold to the public as a purely defensive system, is really designed by the Pentagon to be the shield after the first-strike sword has lunged into the heart of a particular nation’s nuclear arsenal.

Living in Bath, Maine, I have a special perspective on this US-China military competition. In my town, the Navy builds the Aegis destroyers that are outfitted with MD systems. Congressional leaders from my state maintain that more Pentagon funds for Aegis shipbuilding are needed to “contain” China.

Renowned author Noam Chomsky says US foreign and military policy is now all about controlling most of the world’s oil supply as a “lever of world domination.” One way to keep Europe, China, India and other emerging markets dependent on the US and in sync with its policies is to maintain control of the fossil fuel supply they’re reliant on. Even as the US economy is collapsing, the Pentagon appears to be saying, whoever controls the keys to the world’s economic engine still remains in charge.

China, for example, imports up to 80% of its oil on ships through the Yellow Sea. If any competitor nation was able to militarily control that transit route and choke off China’s oil supply, its economy could be held hostage.

One is able to see how the Pentagon will use the South Korean Navy base on Jeju Island, now being constructed despite a seven-year determined non-violent campaign opposing the base, to support the potential coastal blockade of China.

8-28-2014 8-59-09 AM

Victim of Anglo-American nuclear weapons: Fallujah, 2004.


For many years Russia and China have introduced resolutions at the UN calling for negotiations on a new treaty that would ban weapons in space.

Since the mid-‘80s every UN member nation has supported the “Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space” (PAROS) resolution, with the exception of the US, Israel, and Micronesia.

This was true during the Clinton presidency as well as during the reign of George W. Bush and now under Obama as well.

8-28-2014 8-59-29 AM

Victim of US nuclear weapons: Hiroshima, 1945.

A full-blown arms race between the US, Russia and China will be a disaster for the world and would make life on Earth less secure. At the very time that global resources are urgently needed to deal with the coming harsh realities of climate change and growing poverty, we can hardly afford to see more money wasted on the further militarization of space and greater superpower conflict.

The Pentagon actually has the largest carbon boot print on the planet. The US insisted that the Pentagon be excluded from the Kyoto climate change protocols and refused to sign the agreements unless the Pentagon was exempted.

As the US undertakes arming the world to the benefit of corporate globalization our local communities have become addicted to military spending. As we oppose the aggressive US military empire overseas we must also talk about the job issue back at home. Calling for conversion of the military industrial complex, demanding that our industrial base be transformed to create a renewable energy infrastructure for the 21st century, helps us come into coalition with weapons production workers who must now support the killing machine if they hope to feed their families.

Image: UK Ministry of Defence warns of new technologies’ potential to trigger a ‘doomsday scenario’

Studies have long shown that conversion from military production to creating needed systems like rail, solar or wind turbines not only help deal with the challenges of climate change but also create many more jobs.

It’s ultimately a question about the soul of the nation – what does it say about us as a people when we continue to build weapons to kill people around the world so workers can put food on the table back home?

What is needed now more than ever is unified global campaigning across issue lines. Peace, social justice, environment, labor and other movements must work harder to link our issues and build integrated grassroots movements against the destructive power of the corporate oligarchies that run most of our western governments. The rush to privatize social welfare and the privatization of foreign and military policy must be challenged if we are to successfully protect the future generations.

 10 13 11 flagbar



By Anna Maria Wilhelmina Hanna Sophia Riezinger-von Reitzenstein von Lettow-Vorbeck,

February 3, 2014

Alaska Supreme Court via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3821

Alaska Judicial Council via US Certified Mail #7012 2210 0000 2447 3753

Alaska Attorney General via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3760

Governor Sean Parnell via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3777

Lt. Governor Mead Treadwell via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3784

US marshal Robert Huen via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3791

Colonel Keith Mallard via US Certified Mail # 7012 2210 0000 2447 3807

Ms. Betsy Lawer, CEO, First National Bank of Alaska via US Certified Mail #7012 2210 0000 2447 3814

Joseph Everheart, Regional President, 301 West Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99501 via US Certified Mail #  7012 2210 0000 2447 3883

Abstract:  Since 1944 the International Monetary Fund (IMF) an agency of the UNITED NATIONS doing business as the UNITED STATES, INC.  dba STATE OF ALASKA   has functioned as a secondary Trust Management Organization (TMO) charged with the fiduciary obligation of fulfilling all service contracts of the bankrupted United States of America, Incorporated, during its Chapter 11 reorganization.   In accepting the assets of the United States of America, Inc. the IMF also accepted its liabilities, which include the claims of the Priority Creditors,  living Americans  who are owed (1) reparations for the seizure of privately owned gold assets by the United States of America, Inc. acting in Breach of Trust during the 1930’s, (2) all interest in their private property, material rights, land, homes, businesses, persons and names that have been improperly entangled in the bankruptcy of the privately owned “United States of America, Incorporated” and (3) the natural resources possessed by the organic, geographically defined states of the Union.

The IMF has claimed to represent the interests of all the Creditors of the United States of America, Inc., but has instead alleged that the living American People— to whom the IMF and its many subsidiaries owe good faith service — are “unknown creditors”.  Chronic abuse by the IMF leadership and politicians acting in conflict of interest as corporate officers and employees of this privately owned and operated for-profit corporation dba the UNITED STATES, INC.— at the same time that they claim to “represent” the American People,  has led to unrestrained and unauthorized hypothecation of public debt against private assets, identity theft, fiduciary malfeasance, fraud, extortion under armed force, and Breach of Trust usurpation.

You are receiving this FINAL NOTICE OF COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEFAULT because you work for the UNITED NATIONS/IMF dba the UNITED STATES, INC. or one of its STATE franchises or agencies, or a banking institution impacted by these facts.  You are responsible in some capacity for meeting the contractual and fiduciary obligations owed to the American People.  You are being made explicitly, individually, personally, and undeniably aware of criminal acts of mis-administration and malfeasance being committed and directed by IMF corporate officers functioning in blatant Breach of Trust and Conflict of Interest while occupying vacated and long-inactive Public Offices.

Absent a specific, fully disclosed, voluntary appointment to act in behalf of specific individual Americans, there is no basis for any claim that any elected or appointed official employed by the UNITED STATES or its STATE franchises, agencies, or subsidiaries, represents anyone but themselves. Election to a corporate office does not imply Power of Attorney.  Election to a private corporate office does not imply election to public office.  The same is true of any elected or appointed official employed by the United States of America, Inc. and its State franchises.

Sean Parnell has been elected to serve as the GOVERNOR of the STATE OF ALASKA, a corporate municipal franchise of the UNITED STATES, INC.   This is not the same office as the Alaska State Governor, a civil office of the organic Alaska State.

The claims of the IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. against the private property and Estates of the American People have been denied and successfully rebutted at the highest levels of world governance.  

The “United States of America, Inc.” has been released from bankruptcy as of July 1, 2013, and all debts related to it and its franchises have been discharged, so that the UNITED STATES, INC. can not bill the United States of America, Inc. for services. 

You are being afforded the opportunity to self-correct and correct the operations of your Office/OFFICE.  Failure to timely do so and provide remedy to those who have been harmed may result in you being prosecuted for impersonating American officials, double indemnity fines, up to ten (10) years in prison for per offense, commercial compensatory damage claims, and dissolution of the IMF, franchise, agency, bank or other corporate charter of the legal fiction entity you work for.




This letter is your COMPLETE AND FINAL NOTICE informing you of crimes being committed under the auspices of your Office/OFFICE, making you individually and personally liable, and serving to make everyone associated with your Office/OFFICE an accomplice to these continuing acts of criminal fraud and malfeasance if immediate action to correct operations is not taken.


America was founded under the administration of commercial Trust Management Organizations, the most famous of which was the Virginia Company. As a result of the Revolutionary War, the American People formed an unincorporated domestic civil government.  The Several states later contracted with an incorporated Trust Management Organization dba “United States” to provide international representation and stipulated public services in common.

The American civil government based on individual and organic state sovereignty is known as The Republic. A more recent Trust Management Organization dba the United States of America, Inc. clearly admitted its status as a mere representative of the Republic when it popularized the Pledge of Allegiance:  “…..and to the Republic for which it stands.”

The Republic originally functioned in international commerce through the agency of an incorporated commercial Trust Management Organization known simply as the “United States”.  George Washington was the Eleventh President of this Trust Management Organization, which predated the Revolutionary War. 

Thus there are two governments in America and there always have been.  The Republic, which is the civil government of the American People, and a Trust Management Organization that is charged with providing nineteen enumerated services for the Sovereign States, most of which deal with international commerce.

The Republic States that entered into the original equity contract known as The Constitution for the united States of America were represented by the original Trust Management Company dba “United States” from 1789 to 1863 when it was entered into bankruptcy caused by the expense of the Civil War.  A second Trust Management Organization called  the “United States of America, Incorporated” functioned from 1871 to 1933.  Thereafter, the United States of America, Inc. was entered into bankruptcy by Executive Order issued by its President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt.  The United States of America, Incorporated, entered into the receivership of International Bankruptcy Trustees, specifically, the Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico, selected by the Creditors —-the IBRD, World Bank, and Federal Reserve.

Since 1944,  the United States of America, Incorporated’s business affairs have been managed by these same international bankruptcy trustees under the direction of these same creditors organized as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) acting  under various corporate names including the UNITED STATES, the UNTED STATES OF AMERICA, the USA, and E PLURIBUS UNUM THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

The State of Alaska is a corporate municipal franchise of the bankrupted United States of America, Incorporated. The STATE OF ALASKA is a corporate municipal franchise of the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED.  These entities are not the same as the geographically defined Alaska State.

These Trust Management Organizations don’t have a contract to operate the civil government, though they have been conniving and contriving to do so for several decades with disastrous results.

All bank officials operating businesses in the geographically defined Alaska State have knowingly or unknowingly set up checking, savings, and other depository accounts, including mortgage and escrow accounts, which result in unlawful conversion of private property into corporate assets. By creating these accounts in the NAMES of individual ESTATE trusts owned and operated by the UNITED STATES, INC. instead of the names of the living people,  private bank accounts belonging to john-quincy:adams have been unlawfully converted to the ownership of Puerto Rican trusts owned and operated by the UNITED STATES, INC. under the NAME of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.

This semantic deceit dependent upon the use of “similar names” and the constructive fraud of non-disclosure practiced by the banks has resulted in claims by the IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. that the funds and contracts under deposit as negotiable instruments are the property of UNITED STATES, INC. “individual franchises” and are subject to seizure by the UNITED STATES, INC. and available to serve as collateral backing the debts of the UNITED STATES, INC.

All banks and bank officials operating in the Alaska State are under NOTICE and DEMAND to correct their records to reflect the fact that all assets contained in or claimed by “individual franchise ESTATE trusts” operated “in the name of” American Nationals and their private unincorporated business enterprises have been redeemed by the American Nationals having the same or similar given names and living at the geographic addresses of record on file.

All bank and bank officials operating in the Alaska State are under NOTICE that any claim presented by any officer of the UNITED STATES or the STATE OF ALASKA pretending an interest in the private property assets of American Nationals or seeking to withdraw deposits under the authority of the Dodd-Frank Act are prohibited from any such action by Public Law of the Republic, and that any bank complying with such demand will be liquidated. Any banker aiding or abetting unlawful conversion of private assets for the benefit of the IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable under American Common Law.

Any corporate Officer/OFFICER receiving this NOTICE who is unaware of the facts presented is invited to contact Interpol, the nearest Vatican Legate, or the International Services Agent for Alaska.  

Any corporate Officer/OFFICER receiving this NOTICE who believes that we are misunderstanding any of the historical facts or any aspect of the material circumstance, is invited to produce the single document which they believe grants their agency or Office/OFFICE jurisdiction and/or controlling ownership interest in living Americans, their private property assets, their credit, their labor, their organic states or any other material assets.

In “representing” the Republic, the United States of America, Incorporated, was bound to honor all the contracts and Public Laws established by the Republic.  In receivership, the United States of America, Incorporated, had to be operated according to the same Trust Indenture that was established by the Preamble and Bill of Rights, because it is not possible to receive the assets in bankruptcy without also receiving the liabilities.  The UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED, acting as a secondary Trust Management Organizaton since 1933 has in turn undertaken to “represent” the United States of America, Incorporated, and is bound by the same obligations.

We will address, briefly, the common claim made by Officers/OFFICERS representing either the “United States of America, Inc.” or the UNITED STATES, INC. to the effect that living American Nationals are “US citizens” subject to domination by any incorporated entity under contract to serve them.

According to the Act of the Republic enacted as Public Law by the Members of Congress Assembled as an unincorporated Body Politic of the Domestic States on April 14, 1802, (2 Stat. 153, c. 28, ss.1, Revised Statute 2165)—“an alien may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States in the following manner, and not otherwise.”

This is Public Law fully enacted as substantive law by the unincorporated Body Politic operating under full commercial liability as the domestic civil government of the Several States. It cannot be amended or repealed by any “Act” of any incorporated Trust Management Organization claiming to represent the Republic, and it sets forth a lengthy process that is required to redefine any American National as a “US citizen” subject to the corporate jurisdiction of the United States of America, Inc. and/or its Bankruptcy Trustees and successors, such as the UNITED STATES, STATE OF ALASKA, etc.

Any claim that any private contract entered into by individuals can magically overcome this prerequisite of Public Law stands mute and disproven by the entirety of the Federal Register and Code, which unfailingly describes American Nationals domiciled in the geographically defined organic states as “non-resident aliens” with respect to the United States of America, Inc. and its municipal jurisdiction.

Virtually no American Nationals have ever deliberately undertaken to become “US citizens” as required by US Statute at Large 2.  They have not  by any knowing and voluntary act agreed to stand as sureties for a bankrupt Trust Management Organization calling itself the “United States of America” in 1930, 1933, 1959, or at any other time.  They have not agreed under conditions of full disclosure to contract at all with the UNITED STATES, INC. to provide any services, much less have they granted any authorization to this foreign, privately-owned banking cartel to “represent” them or their interests as Priority Creditors of the United States of America, Inc.

They did not grant authorization to any Governor/GOVERNOR or other elected or appointed official, corporate officer, employee, or hired contractor of the United States of America, Incorporated or the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED, to represent them or their interests in these matters at any time from the founding of the Republic to date.

They did not under conditions of full disclosure voluntarily grant authorization allowing any Trust Management Company to operate public trusts under their individual names, to lay claim to their private assets by presumption under color of law, to hypothecate debt based upon the value of their labor, their homes, land, or other resources, or to otherwise impose the debts, statutes, codes, or regulations of any corporation upon them.  

In 1995 a group of American Nationals moved to redeem and reclaim the individually named ESTATES created by the Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico, the Bankruptcy Trustee appointed by the IMF.   These Americans provided proof to the Internal Revenue Service/IRS and the Custodian of Alien Property/CUSTODIAN OF ALIEN PROPERTY and the US Bankruptcy Trustees/US BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEES that they were alive and competent to administer their own affairs, and that they were Priority Creditors of the United States of America, Incorporated.  At that time and ever since, they have objected to any presumption that they are or ever were “wards of any State or STATE”—-  ever incorporated, incompetent, or disabled.

They have uniformly declared and testified before the world that they have been defrauded, lied to, lied about, victimized by deliberate semantic deceit, suffered extortion, armed robbery, gross fiduciary malfeasance, inland piracy, conspiracy against their rights and material interests, have suffered from self-interested non-disclosure, breach of trust, despotism, and default of commercial contract—all at the hands of Trust Management Organizations that are obligated to function in good faith and with full fiduciary liability.

They have repudiated the claims of the United States of America, Inc. and the UNITED STATES, INC. which are merely privately owned for-profit commercial corporations no different than Microsoft, Incorporated, which have sought to attach the private property assets of individual American Nationals and the assets of the Republic via fraudulent deceit and misrepresentation.  These Americans reclaimed their full sovereign authority among the nations of the world, and they redeemed all assets held in “public trusts” created by the United States of America, Inc. and the UNITED STATES, INC.

All debt accrued against any public trusts operated under the given names or variations thereof of American Nationals by the United States of America, Incorporated or the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED and any and all incorporated franchises of these Trust Management Organizations—-including the State of Alaska,  STATE OF ALASKA,  WELLS FARGO, INC., ABC MORTGAGE, INC, and so on—- is to be discharged, dollar for dollar, without exception.  Clear fee simple title to the assets is to be returned to the individual American Nationals and the organic states of the Republic.

The American Nationals have issued no valid proxy authorizing any agency, elected official, corporate officer, foreign agent or public employee of the United States of America, Inc. or the UNITED STATES, INC. to “represent” them in an abusive manner contrary to their material interests, nor did they grant any such authority to the Trust Management Organizations to represent them regarding these specific matters. They recognize no claims brought against them, their private property assets, or their organic states which are based on representations made “in their behalf” by third parties acting in Breach of Trust and contract default.

The leadership of the UNITED STATES, INC. known as the US CONGRESS has recently passed the Dodd/Frank Bill, gratuitously granting themselves the right to pillage the bank accounts of Americans which have been purposely and self-interested constructed by the IMF dba UNITED STATES as accounts belonging to federal franchise “ESTATE trusts” without the knowledge or consent of the victims.

The criminal intent of these actions is self-evident—first to unlawfully convert private bank accounts to the ownership of “public trusts” owned and operated by for-profit corporations merely pretending to “represent” the victims, second to claim that these private assets have been voluntarily “donated” to the public trust franchises, or “abandoned” by the legitimate beneficiaries of the assets.

This NOTICE is your individual passport to a real “federal” prison if you do not immediately cease and desist all participation in support of these claims, actions, and intents.  

The living man, whose given name is properly written in this form: john-quincy:adams has been induced by undeclared foreign agents of the IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. and the FEDERAL RESERVE dba United States of America, Inc. to believe that he is depositing his private property into his own private bank account, but in fact, he is always depositing his private property into a bank account owned by “John Quincy Adams” which is a foreign situs trust owned and operated by the United States of America, Inc. or  “JOHN QUINCY ADAMS” which is an ESTATE trust owned by the banks operating the  UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED.

Any Officer/OFFICER receiving this NOTICE who doubts that this is true is invited to pull out their “personal check book” and look at what appears to be the signature line under high magnification.  You will see under high magnification that the line is not a line.  It is a row of microprint endlessly repeating “authorizing signature” over and over.  This verbiage has to be there, because the “owner” of the account, YOUR NAME, is a Puerto Rican Trust, and can’t function without human agents.

The IMF, dba UNITED STATES, INC., has deceived millions of Americans into depositing  their private assets into “public franchise accounts” without their knowledge or consent. Most likely many of the Officers/OFFICERS reading this NOTICE have been similarly victimized by this foreign interloper’s deceit, fraud, and self-interest.  To lead you along in this deception they have allowed you to write checks on “their” account and claimed that you are an employee of their corporation—and as such, required to obey all their “laws”, rules, codes, statutes, and regulations that they may deem appropriate to establish and enforce.

This is all a form of bunko that has only been made possible because the banks operating as creditors gained a position of trust via the bankrupting of the Trust Management Organization dba the United States of America, Inc. 

The IMF gained control of the apparatus of government services by creating the Secondary Trust Management Organization dba UNITED STATES, INC. which has been “filling in” while the United States of America, Inc. was in receivership.  The FEDERAL RESERVE, another privately owned banking cartel, gained a similar position of trust as the primary creditor of the United States of America, Inc. throughout its bankruptcy reorganization.

The IMF dba UNITED STATES and its corporate OFFICERS and their appointed Bankruptcy Trustees commandeered the apparatus of what Americans mistakenly thought of as their government, claimed to “represent” the American People, and have gone on an eighty-year rampage of white collar fraud the likes of which has never been seen in the history of the world.

The IMF dba UNITED STATES, INC. has claimed that the American People have had a free choice in the midst of all this misrepresentation and unlawful conversion of assets.  They could “redeem” their property held in the franchise ESTATE trusts set up in their NAMES by the banks at any time, simply by notifying the proper officials — the Internal Revenue Service.

The American Nationals were never told any of this, so this remedy was never actually made available in any practical sense to the millions of rank and file Priority Creditors of the United States of America, Inc.

The two Trust Management Organizations dba the United States of America, Inc. and the UNITED STATES, INC., were and are, both obligated to defend the National Trust, including the material interests and rights of individual Americans who are beneficiaries of the National Trust Indenture.

Breach of Trust results in severance of contract, including the service contracts that go along with the fiduciary obligations owed as liabilities of the IMF and its agencies and franchises to the living beneficiaries—the American Nationals.

Any concerted attempt by Trustees—whether individuals or entire vast incorporated Trust Management Organizations—-to impose upon the beneficiaries of a trust or to usurp the assets and collateral held in trust for the Trustees or the Trust Manager’s own benefit, is a High Crime of Felony Fraud and Criminal Malfeasance.

The Supreme Court for the State of Alaska/THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA and The Superior Court for the State of Alaska / THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA have been informed of these facts and have failed to correct their operations. 

These Undeclared Foreign Agents and Agencies employed jointly by the FEDERAL RESERVE, a privately owned and operated Central Bank employed by the bankrupted “United States of America, Inc.” and the IMF operating the UNITED STATES, INC.,  have continued to presume a controlling interest in the assets of individual American Nationals and in already-redeemed individual ESTATES and to also presume that the private property assets of individual Americans were offered as surety and collateral for debts owed by the “United States of America, Inc.”  –all based on insupportable and undocumented representations made by unauthorized third parties acting in Breach of Trust eighty years ago.

They have continued on this course knowingly and despite having their offers to contract refused and all these false presumptions thoroughly rebutted in individual court actions entered as demonstration cases:  3AN-12-6858CI and 3PA-12-1447CI.

This NOTICE includes presentation of charges against the Clerks and Judges operating The Superior District Court for the State of Alaska and the CLERKS and JUDGES operating THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA.

If these Officers of the British Crown do not immediately cease and desist in their activities in support of the fraudulent misrepresentations and claims being made by their employers they will be subject to deportation and seizure of their individual property assets in Alaska.

This is your individual and personal NOTICE that not only are “Governors” of the “United States of America, Inc.” and “GOVERNORS” of the “UNITED STATES” not authorized or empowered to pledge private property of any American National,  they were never empowered to pledge any assets of the organic states, either.

All “Acts”, pledges, agreements, and policies of the “US Congress” and “State Governors” operating the “United States of America, Inc.” —-a privately owned commercial corporation under contract to serve the Americans—- and pretending to have affect upon living American Nationals, their private property assets, or their organic states is fraudulent, null and void as if these Acts never existed.

All “ACTS” of the “US CONGRESS” and “STATE GOVERNORS” operating the UNITED STATES, INC—-a privately owned commercial corporation under contract to serve the Americans— and pretending to have affect upon living American Nationals, their private property assets, or their organic states is fraudulent, null and void as if these ACTS never were.

Similarly, all “legislative acts” of the State of Alaska and the STATE OF ALASKA operating as corporate municipal franchises of the “United States of America, Inc.” or the “UNITED STATES, INC.” which pretend to have affect upon Alaskans, their private property assets, or their organic states, are fraudulent, null and void as if they never were.

All rules, statutes, codes, regulations, taxes, tithes, fees, penalties, and “laws” established by these corporations apply only to their employees and their corporate officers, similar to the internal policies set by any other commercial corporation on earth.  Any pretension that any individual American National is obligated to obey these instruments of corporate policy as an “employee” must be backed up with proof of fully disclosed employment contracts and agreements.

This NOTICE informs you individually and personally that the individual living American Nationals, their private property, and their organic states, are NOT subject to any law, statute, rule, code, regulation, order, or internal policy promulgated by any incorporated entity.

THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA and the STATE OF ALASKA have been fully informed of these facts and have received and are right now receiving direct instruction from the actual Entitlement Holders regarding the status and proper administration of the individual Estates/ESTATES of Alaskans.

All corporate Officers/OFFICERS receiving this NOTICE now have cause to know that they cannot rely upon second-hand direction received from third parties merely claiming to “represent” individual Alaskans, nor claiming to have controlling interest in private assets held in public trusts that have been established “in the name of” individual Alaskans by the United States of America, Inc.  and the UNITED STATES, INC.

All the individually named public trusts generated by the two Trust Management Organizations dba the United States of America, Inc. and the UNITED STATES, INC. are legal fictions which have been created under the auspices of the Holy See and the Roman Curia and misused as a means to plunder the private property assets of Americans and their organic states under color of law. 

The persons promulgating, preserving, and supporting this abuse and fraud are criminals—outlaws on the land, and pirates on the sea.  Anyone receiving this NOTICE who does not immediately cease and desist and correct their behavior, presumptions, and operations in whatever office they hold, is fully liable. 

In “the name of” public trusts, the Trust Management Organizations pretending to represent the American states and individual living Americans have gone on compiling debts, creating bankruptcies, making false commercial claims, and otherwise seeking to ensnare and obligate assets of the US Trust for the benefit of their private shareholders for eighty years.

This is your FINAL NOTICE of these facts.  You will be held individually and personally liable and accountable for any support of or continuing participation in these acts of fraud and breach of trust.

Members of the Bar Association who are by definition citizens of the Inner City of London City State and foreigners on American soil will be subject to deportation and seizure of all their private assets if they continue to presume against and impose upon the American Nationals who are their ultimate employers.

Corporate officers of the United States of America, Inc.  or the UNITED STATES, INC. who continue to impersonate state judges or pretend to act as state civil officials, will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the American Common Law if they do not voluntarily come into compliance and live within the limitations of their actual Office/OFFICE.

None of these Trust Management Organization schemes and actions— bankruptcies, debts, service contracts, etc. — have anything to do with any living American nor with any geographically defined state of the Union nor with any private assets belonging to these peaceful unincorporated entities, but through purposeful semantic deceit and fraud, false claims arising among these incorporated entities have been allowed to bleed over and impact the beneficiaries of the US Trust.

All of this uproar, all these claims and counter-claims, all these legal fiction entities battling it out with each other in corporate administrative tribunals,  have nothing whatsoever to do with the living people, their private assets or their organic states—and they never have had. 

The only business any living American National has with any corporate administrative tribunal functioning as a Court/COURT is (1) to inform the personnel operating the Court/COURT of facts pertaining to some issue being considered, or (2) to present a claim against the United States of America, Inc. or the UNITED STATES, INC. or one of their franchises, such as the STATE OF ALASKA.  See the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946 for statutory admission.

Beginning in 2009, American Nationals took their claims against the United States of America, Incorporated and the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED —both— to the Holy See.

This is your individual and personal NOTICE that all authority to create legal fictions—trusts, public utilities, corporations, foundations, and cooperatives—derives directly and explicitly from the Holy See and from the law forms established and copyrighted by the Roman Curia.

Along with the power to create comes the power to destroy.

The Holy See has the power and the right to dissolve the UNITED NATIONS Charter, the IMF Charter, the UNITED STATES Charter, and so on, ad infinitum, to order the distribution of the assets of these legal fiction entities to their creditors, and the Pope has the additional unlimited ability to rewrite or void any “law” created by any incorporated entity worldwide.

In 2010 Pope Benedict XVI agreed with the American Nationals that gross Breach of Trust and fiduciary malfeasance related to the administration of the US National Trust and the individually named public trusts has occurred.

Remedy begun in 2010 has been continued by Pope Francis dba FRANCISCUS, acting as CEO of the Global Estate Trust.

This correction is coming directly from the Highest Contracting Powers, from the very top of the interlocking trust directorate that has incorporated virtually all the Trust Management Organizations responsible for administering government services worldwide—including both the United States of America, Incorporated, and the UNITED STATES, INCORPORATED.

Private attorneys and civil postmasters and international diplomatic agents in every organic state of the Union have been appointed either directly by the Holy See or under the Holy See’s direction to communicate these facts to all those responsible for the administration of the Trust Management Organizations and their franchises and agencies responsible for the deplorable conditions of abuse, fraud, and criminality engulfing America.

This is your FINAL NOTICE: The legal fiction organizations you work for will be liquidated if they do not come into compliance and function lawfully.

Demonstration court cases have been prosecuted in Alaska seeking to re-educate those who are individually responsible for administration of the respective Trust Management Organizations, their franchises, and agencies. Every good faith effort has been made to provide discussion and bring the recipients of this NOTICE to their senses, to avoid the necessity of dissolving corporate charters and forcing arrests, but clearly, correction must be made and it must be done with alacrity to avoid further damage to the American Nationals and their organic states.

Case Number 3AN-12-6858CI was prosecuted entirely via Special Appearance—by definition, merely to inform THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA.

The COURT pretended to have jurisdiction it didn’t have, grossly misrepresented its authority,  willfully concealed its actual nature, function, and role, failed to require validated proof of an international commercial claim, failed to require identification of the true parties of interest, failed to require proof of ownership and provenance of an unregistered Promissory Note, pretended to misunderstand clearly enunciated statements denying consent and claims of identity, and pretended to have authority to seize private property assets under Federal Debt Collection Procedures though no viable public trusts, federal or State,  were even in evidence.  Officers of the COURT dba JERMAIN, DUNNAGAN, and OWENS in the person of MICHELE BOUTIN, ESQ. hired the ALASKA STATE TROOPERS to trespass on private property and to extort over $100,000.00 USD under armed force.

Confronted with the facts, THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA failed to take appropriate corrective action and instead acted as an accomplice to the errors and crimes committed.

Another case 3PA-12-1447CI was similarly prosecuted.   After voluminous correspondence with the COURT, the MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH, and the respective political officials, someone, somewhere, bowed to the simple truth—that the MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH is a franchise of the STATE OF ALASKA which is a franchise of the UNITED STATES, INC. which is providing services based on fraudulent misrepresentation and without a valid contract, and then demanding payment and alleging a security interest in private property that isn’t theirs.   The MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH  foreclosure action was dropped and the supposed “tax debt” erased from the books, but the next year they attempted to repeat the same errors and commit the same acts of mis-administration and malfeasance.

The “United States of America, Inc.” and the UNITED STATES, INC. are both commercial corporations—-privately and mostly foreign-owned commercial corporations.  They have no special standing at all.  With respect to American Nationals they have precisely the same standing as any other multi-national corporate conglomerate.

This is your NOTICE of the facts.  These incorporated entities can’t force individual American Nationals to accept services, buy insurance, pay taxes, or do anything else based on the representations of third parties merely claiming to represent them. They have no authority to arrest, imprison, or detain any American National for any “crime” lacking a corpus delecti demonstrating actual harm to other living people or their property.  If they persist in providing services without a valid contract, they have no recourse to complain if they don’t get paid and no enforceable security interest in private property. 

The American People are accommodating these Trust Management Organizations and paying them to provide stipulated government services, not the other way around. It should not be necessary for individual Americans to prosecute law suits simply to secure the proper administration of long-standing fiduciary obligations from their employees and service vendors.

Consider carefully the consequences of continuing to mis-administer the public trusts and using these deceptively named commercial vessels as an excuse to plunder the private property assets of the American People.  Piracy, including inland piracy, is a crime. As of September 1, 2013, each corporate officer, each hired administrator, is individually liable, from the “President of the UNITED STATES” on down to the lowliest clerk.

The United States, Canada, Australia, England, Ireland, Scotland, New Zealand, South Africa—-have all been similarly victimized by international bankers and the self-serving and/or ignorant politicians who have betrayed the interests of the people they claim to represent.

These countries all stand to be devastated by a struggle to force the politicians, administrators, bankers and jurists responsible for this mess to (1) get their hands out of other people’s pockets, (2) do their actual jobs, (3) stop making insupportable claims against private property assets that don’t belong to the corporations they work for, and (4) refuse to execute “orders” received from the “President” of a corporation that has exactly the same relationship with respect to American Nationals as the President of J.C. PENNY or the President of SOUTHWEST AIR, INC.

In one capacity or another, you are all responsible for oversight and administration of the Trust Management Organizations involved in this national-scale debacle. You all have cause to know what the truth is and to act accordingly.  There should be no doubt in your minds that the fiduciary obligations described herein exist and that the contracts creating and protecting the National Trust Indenture will be honored— even if it requires armed intervention, arrests, and liquidation of the world’s largest financial institutions.

Undeclared Foreign Agents have operated the Alaska Court System / ALASKA COURT SYSTEM and The Superior District Court for the State of Alaska / THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA in an stubbornly criminal and fraudulent manner in violation of their corporate charter, resulting in false claims of jurisdiction, grand felony acts of armed extortion and inland piracy, fiduciary malfeasance, constructive fraud, unlawful conversion, and numerous other crimes including assaults against unarmed American civilians.

In 3AN-12- 6858CI THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA employed all the fraud gambits described herein, including grossly over-stepping its jurisdiction.  THE SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA, INC. owes the private estate trust pillaged in that matter over $400,000.00 USD times (4) four as compensatory damages.  Until that debt is paid and restitution to the individual American Nationals made, the STATE OF ALASKA is in Breach of Trust and Contract Default increasing the Public Debt, in violation of its Corporate Charter, and is subject to dissolution.  A complete bounty collection of $50,000,000.00 USD may additionally be applied against the State of Alaska, Inc. for violation of XIV Section 4 of its Charter.

This is your individual and personal NOTICE that failure to stop crime, like failure to make every reasonable effort to prevent crime, makes you an accomplice to the crime. You are liable. You have been fully informed.  This NOTICE has been recorded worldwide. Failure to render assistance and provide remedy to the victims of crime also makes you an accomplice to the crime.

Criminality of the kind described herein and failure to honor contractual and fiduciary duties owed is due cause for severance of your contract for services, criminal prosecution, and dissolution of the corporations you work for.  Cease and desist all improper actions.

This NOTICE is by my hand and upon my civil authority set this ______day of February, 2014:



Anna Maria Wilhelmina Hanna Sophia Riezinger-von Reitzenstein von Lettow-Vorbeck, Private Attorney in Service to His Holiness, Pope Francis

In Care Of: Box 520994

Big Lake, Alaska

 Under Seal:

10 13 11 flagbar



The Final Nail in the Coffin: The Death of Freedom in Our Schools


By John W. Whitehead

August 26, 2014

“Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grandchildren are once more slaves.”

D.H. Lawrence

No matter what your perspective on the showdown between locals and law enforcement in Ferguson, Missouri, there can be no disputing the fact that “local” police should not be looking or acting like branches of the military.

Unfortunately, in the police state that is America today, we’re going to find ourselves revisiting Ferguson over and over again. Every time an unarmed citizen gets shot by a police officer who is armed to the hilt, or inclined to shoot first and ask questions later, or so concerned about their own safety, to the exclusion of all else, that everything becomes a potential threat, we’ll find ourselves back in Ferguson territory again.

Here’s the thing, though: whether or not it ever gets reported, whether it incites any protests or marches or showdowns of epic proportions, whether it elicits any outrage on the part of the citizenry, Ferguson is already happening over and over again, all around us.

It’s happening in small towns and big cities alike every time a citizen gets stopped and frisked for no better reason than they “look” suspicious. It’s happening on the nation’s highways and byways, where corporate greed disguised as road safety is making a hefty profit off of drivers who have the misfortune of passing a red light camera or a speed camera or a license plate reader. It’s happening in the privately run jails, which are teeming with prisoners doing time for nonviolent crimes that should have landed them with a slap on the wrist and a fine instead of hard time and forced labor.

It’s happening in our airports and train stations and shopping malls, where menacing squads of black-garbed, jack-booted, up-armored soldiers disguised as law enforcement officials are subjecting Americans to roving security checkpoints, allegedly in the pursuit of terrorists. And it’s happening in the schools, where the school-to-prison pipeline is fully operational and busy churning out newly minted citizens of the American police state who have been taught the hard way what it means to comply and march in lockstep with the government’s dictates.

Young Alex Stone didn’t even make it past the first week of school before he became a victim of the police state. Directed by his teacher to do a creative writing assignment involving a series of fictional Facebook statuses, Stone wrote, “I killed my neighbor’s pet dinosaur. I bought the gun to take care of the business.” Despite the fact that dinosaurs are extinct, the status fabricated, and the South Carolina student was merely following orders, his teacher reported him to school administrators, who in turn called the police.

What followed is par for the course in schools today: students were locked down in their classrooms while armed police searched the 16-year-old’s locker and bookbag, handcuffed him, charged him with disorderly conduct disturbing the school, arrested him, detained him, and then he was suspended from school. Stone’s mother was never alerted to the school’s concerns about her son’s creative writing assignment or his subsequent interrogation and arrest.

Keshana Wilson, a 14-year-old student at a Pennsylvania high school, was tasered in the groin by a police officer working as a school resource officer, allegedly because she resisted arrest for cursing, inciting a crowd of students, and walking on the highway. One might be hard pressed to find a teenager not guilty of one or the other at any given time. Nevertheless, the tasering came after the officer grabbed the teenager from behind and pushed her up against a car, without identifying himself as a police officer. “The teenager had to be taken to hospital to have the taser probes removed before she was arrested and charged with aggravated assault on the officer, simple assault, riot, resisting arrest, disorderly conduct, failure to disperse and walking on the highway,” noted one reporter.

Rounding out the lesson in compliance, police officers who patrol schools in Compton, Calif., are now authorized to buy semi-automatic AR-15 rifles and carry them in their patrol car trunks while on duty—a practice that is becoming increasingly common, according to Joe Grubbs, president of the California Association of School Resource Officers. A few states away, in Missouri, a new state law actually requires that all school districts participate in live-action school shooting drills, including realistic gunfire, students covered in fake blood, and bodies strewn throughout the hallways.

Now these incidents may seem light years away from the all-too-grim reality of the events that took place in Ferguson, Missouri, but they are, in fact, mere stops along the way to the American police state, and parents with kids returning to school would do well to consider these incidents fair warning, because today’s public schools have become microcosms of the world beyond the schoolhouse gates, and increasingly, it’s a world hostile to freedom.

As I show in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, within America’s public schools can be found almost every aspect of the American police state that plagues those of us on the “outside”: metal detectors, surveillance cameras, militarized police, drug-sniffing dogs, tasers, cyber-surveillance, random searches, senseless arrests, jail time, the list goes on.

Whether it takes the form of draconian zero tolerance policies, overreaching anti-bullying statutes, police officers charged with tasering and arresting so-called unruly children, standardized testing with its emphasis on rote answers, political correctness, or the extensive surveillance systems cropping up in schools all over the country, young people in America are first in line to be indoctrinated into compliant citizens of the new American police state.

Zero tolerance policies, which punish all offenses severely, no matter how minor, condition young people to steer clear of doing anything that might be considered out of line, whether it’s pointing their fingers like a gun, drawing on their desks, or chewing their gum too loudly.

Surveillance technologies, used by school officials, police, NSA agents, and corporate entities to track the everyday activities of students, accustom young people to life in an electronic concentration camp, with all of their movements monitored, their interactions assessed, and their activities recorded and archived. For example, the Department of Education (DOE) has created a system to track, archive and disseminate data on every single part of a child’s educational career with colleges and state agencies such as the Department of Labor and the offices of Technology and Children and Family Services.

Metal detectors at school entrances and police patrolling school hallways acclimatize young people to being viewed as suspects. Funded in part by federal grants, school districts across the country have “paid local police agencies to provide armed ‘school resource officers’ for high schools, middle schools and sometimes even elementary schools.” As the New York Times reports, “Hundreds of additional districts, including those in Houston, Los Angeles and Philadelphia, have created police forces of their own, employing thousands of sworn officers.” The problem, of course, is that the very presence of these police officers in the schools results in greater numbers of students being arrested or charged with crimes for nonviolent, childish behavior. In Texas, for example, school police officers write more than 100,000 misdemeanor tickets a year, each ticket amounting to hundreds of dollars in court fines—a convenient financial windfall for the states. All too often, these incidents remain on students’ permanent records, impacting college and job applications.

Weapons of compliance, such as tasers which deliver electrical shocks lethal enough to kill, not only teach young people to fear the police, the face of our militarized government, but teach them that torture is an accepted means of controlling the population. It’s a problem that has grown exponentially as the schools have increasingly clamored for—and hired on—their own police forces. One high school student in Texas suffered severe brain damage and nearly died after being tasered. A 15-year-old disabled North Carolina student was tasered three times, resulting in punctured lungs. A New York student was similarly tasered for lying on the floor and crying.

Standardized testing and Common Core programs, which discourage students from thinking for themselves while rewarding them for regurgitating whatever the government, through its so-called educational standards, dictates they should be taught, will not only create a generation of test-takers capable of little else, but it will also constitute massive data collection on virtually every aspect of our children’s lives which will be accessed by government agents and their corporate allies.

Overt censorship, monitoring and political correctness, which manifest themselves in a variety of ways, from Internet filters on school computers to sexual harassment policies, habituate young people to a world in which nonconformist, divergent, politically incorrect ideas and speech are treated as unacceptable or dangerous. In such an environment, a science teacher criticizing evolution can get fired for insubordination, a 9-year-old boy remarking that his teacher is “cute” can be suspended for sexual harassment, students detected using their smart phones during class time can be reported for not paying attention in class, and those accused of engaging in “bullying, cyber-bullying, hate and shaming activities, depression, harm and self harm, self hate and suicide, crime, vandalism, substance abuse and truancy” on social media such as Twitter or Facebook, will have their posts and comments analyzed by an outside government contractor.

As problematic as all of these programs are, however, what’s really unnerving are the similarities between the American system of public education and that of totalitarian regimes such as Nazi Germany, with their overt campaigns of educational indoctrination. And while those who run America’s schools may not be deliberately attempting to raise up a generation of Hitler Youth, they are teaching young people to march in lockstep with the all-powerful government—which may be just as dangerous in the end.

You don’t have to take my word for it. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum provides some valuable insight into education in the Nazi state, which was responsible for winning “millions of German young people … over to Nazism in the classroom and through extracurricular activities.” The similarities are startling, ranging from the dismissal of teachers deemed to be “politically unreliable” to the introduction of classroom textbooks that taught students obedience to state authority and militarism. “Board games and toys for children served as another way to spread racial and political propaganda to German youth. Toys were also used as propaganda vehicles to indoctrinate children into militarism.” And then there was the Hitler Youth, a paramilitary youth group intended to train young people for future service in the armed forces and government.

Hitler himself recognized the value of indoctrinating young people. As he noted, “When an opponent declares, ‘I will not come over to your side, and you will not get me on your side,’ I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to me already. A people lives forever. What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants however now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.’”

In the face of such a mechanized, bureaucratic school system that demands conformity, indoctrinating and enslaving their minds while punishing anyone who dares step out of line, American school children are indeed powerless. And they will remain helpless, powerless and in bondage to the police state unless “we the people” take the steps to set them free.


If Mr. Whitehead is wrong, where did all of the brain-washed educators come from?

10 13 11 flagbar







Washington’s Grand Ambition Explains Its Pressures on Russia


 By Michael S. Rozeff

August 20, 2014 “ICH” – “Lew Rockwell” — After the Soviet Union ended, Washington switched without a second’s delay from an anti-USSR policy to an anti-Russia policy. This included extending NATO to Russia’s borders in violation of earlier false signals and assurances that it would not, and it included Washington’s unilateral withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. It included U.S. support of anti-Russian leaders in Georgia and Ukraine. It has included a wide range of other steps, such as trying to diminish Russia’s role as a European energy supplier. Anti-Russian policies extend to supporting NGOs inside Russia and even to supporting a minor event like the Pussy Riot stunt. Although U.S.-Russian cooperation has surfaced in some respects, for tactical reasons, there is also no doubt that Washington’s main thrust has been one of pressuring Russia and antagonizing her.

The sanctions imposed on Russia this year by Obama are only the latest steps. These go further. They attempt to isolate Russia and to pressure her on a matter of strategic importance, namely, Crimea. Ukraine is an excuse for Washington’s sanctions agenda as well as a continuation of its earlier anti-Russian policies. By linking the sanctions to Crimean withdrawal, as Obama has done, Washington intends to maintain sanctions as a tool of pressuring Russia indefinitely, knowing that Russia will not withdraw from that strategic and historically connected region under pressure from Washington. Washington has created a permanent bone of contention with Russia over Crimea, and the sanctions will remain as a permanent source of friction. Russia will adapt to them, however, shifting its policies and attention in other parts of the world.

What does Washington want of Russia? Why does it have an anti-Russian policy? At the deepest level, the U.S. government wants global dominance. It wants its system and institutions to be replicated throughout the world. Imperial ambitions are the broadest reasons, and they are fueled by a broad range of quests, from material acquisition to cultural, religious, philosophical and ideological motives.

This grand ambition of global dominance explains the U.S. presence globally and its continued attempts to control every region in the world, despite numerous setbacks and continued failures. Achieving this ambition is not possible, but the attempt and striving are part of the U.S. makeup, driving its leadership beyond any rational limits. Defeats mean little in the face of this ambition. They even cause redoubled efforts to succeed.

The U.S. leadership is by and large imbued with a set of beliefs, perceptions and drives that were born and nurtured over a long historical period in which the nation expanded geographically and then began to have pretensions of worldwide leadership. The associated ideas are now deeply entrenched in the minds of American leaders, and this is reflected in the resulting policies. This is now the leadership culture. Dissenting ideas and alternative visions and voices are constantly ignored and marginalized. It is as difficult to alter these drives as it is to alter a person’s personality.

The thing that prevents the U.S. from following through with its ambition is that to achieve it is so costly. The U.S. keeps running into very great obstacles that cost it dearly in this vain attempt. A Vietnam War, a Korean War, an Iraq War, an Afghanistan War, for example, cost fantastic amounts of money, and no victories occur. Yet the expansionist drive is ceaseless.

Every regional policy of the U.S. can be understood in terms of this grand but futile design. The U.S. wants Europe to be orbiting around the U.S., not around Russia. This is why Putin’s attempts to bring Russia into a Greater Europe cannot be tolerated by the U.S. This is why the U.S. will contest and compete for remote central Asian nations. It is why its costly and counter-productive efforts in the Middle East go on and on. Retreats and withdrawals are necessary when the U.S. loses, but instead its leaders declare that it is victorious. Members of the governing elite consistently refuse to recognize reality, acknowledge their errors and moderate their grand ambition and design. Their behavior is forced to reflect costs, losses and retreats, but those actions are seen as tactical and temporary. There is no fundamental change in attitudes within the leadership, no basic change in ideas. Deeply-held motives and beliefs hold sway over reason and rationality, preventing conceptual changes from occurring. The basic policy, the basic thrust of global dominance remains intact, even if it meets with frustration. This policy is so irrational that the U.S. now is committing itself to a large number of countries in Africa. It is so irrational that the U.S. is seeking to isolate Russia from the rest of the world.

As part of this ambition, the U.S. wants other countries to be clones of itself. America’s leaders want other nations to adopt domestic policies like its own. This aim is something like demanding that they adopt the true religion and convert, except that the religion is a wide-ranging political-legal-cultural-economic one. The agenda is whatever the current ruling elite in Washington has fastened upon, in words if not in deeds. Washington waves many banners in the faces of the world’s nations. They may read rule of law, LGBT rights, environmental protection, labor laws, free and fair trade, human rights, and freedom of religion. They may involve a range of financial institutions: IMF, World Bank, central banks, BIS, and IBRD, to name a few. They may involve military alliances, training, arms sales and police forces. They may involve aid of various kinds and business deals. The overall ambition is that other countries become part of a system that the U.S. has developed and controls.

This ambition has no room to tolerate competing visions, competing ideas and competing powers. If a country has its own history, ways, culture, legal system, moral rules and forms of governance, they count for little to Washington. They will be looked upon as obstacles to Americanization and as things that can be destroyed, ignored, changed or shunted aside.

What does the U.S. want of Russia? It wants Russia to look like America. It wants Russia to be open to American development and/or exploitation. It wants the same thing for every other country on earth. That’s the enduring goal and objective of the U.S. leadership, tantamount to a ruling orthodoxy and religion. This ideal is outrageous and extreme, intolerant, and impossible to achieve. America’s attempts to bring this objective to pass have caused immense agony and death in many countries. Nevertheless, this belief and everything that goes into it will appear to be eminently reasonable for those who hold a belief in American exceptionalism and promote it. The grand imperialistic ambition of a world that looks and acts American is the most significant factor in explaining the actions of the U.S. leadership for a very long period of time.

Michael S. Rozeff [] is a retired Professor of Finance living in East Amherst, New York. He is the author of the free e-book Essays on American Empire: Liberty vs. Domination and the free e-book The U.S. Constitution and Money: Corruption and Decline.

10 13 11 flagbar

Database Shows What Military Equipment Your Local Police Department Has Been Stockpiling


 By Mac Slavo

There’s no doubt that domestic law enforcement agencies on every level have been ramping up their militarization efforts in recent years. In fact, it’s gotten so bad that it has prompted Senator Rand Paul to call for a demilitarization of domestic police departments. “The images and scenes we continue to see in Ferguson resemble war more than traditional police action,” notes Paul in a recent article.

We know that the Department of Homeland Security has been buying up billions of rounds of ammunition, military grade rifles, armored vehicles, riot gear and a host of other supplies. But local police stockpiles have remained fairly hidden from the public, save for the brief peeks we get during mass policing actions like those in Ferguson, Missouri over the last week.

But if you’re interested in what your local county has been stockpiling compliments of The Department of Homeland Security, a database from the military’s Defense Logistics Agency can help.

The Law Enforcement Support Office, under the 1033 program authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act, helps local police departments obtain military equipment for use in their cities. As reported by The Detroit Free Press, over 8,000 participating agencies have taken advantage of LESO offerings from the U.S. military and DHS since the program’s inception:

This law allows for the office to transfer excess Department of Defense property to law enforcement agencies across the United States and its territories.

Since its inception, the 1033 program has transferred more than $5.1 billion worth of property.

In 2013 alone, $449,309,003.71 worth of property was transferred to law enforcement.

Click here to launch the database in a new window for easier viewing.
(Secondary Link to Database Here)

Simply choose your State and your County and you’ll have complete access to see how well militarized your local and county police departments are.

You may or may not be surprised to find everything from mine resistant vehicles and grenade launchers to night vision goggles and high powered assault rifles.

As an example of the heavy militarization efforts of domestic law enforcement agencies, The Detroit Free Press utilized the LESO database to see what Michigan police have been up to in recent years:

A Free Press review of items transferred from the military since 2006 shows Michigan law enforcement agencies have received 17 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles or MRAPs, built to counter roadside bombs; 1,795 M16 rifles (5.56mm), the U.S. military’s combat weapon of choice; 696 M14 rifles (7.62 mm); 530 bayonet and scabbards; 165 utility trucks; 32 12-gauge, riot-type shotguns; nine grenade launchers; and three observation helicopters.

James Quinn of The Burning Platform did a similar investigation into his local area and found that cops in his county of Montgomery, Pennsylvania now have a $733,000 mine resistant vehicle and a $245,000 armored personnel carrier. “I sure hope they will be able to clear all the land mines in my upper class suburban county,” notes Quinn.

The U.S. government has long been war-gaming large-scale economic collapse scenarios and civil unrest simulations, leaving many Americans wondering if they know something we don’t.

Use the LESO database above to find out what they’ve been stockpiling and what you can expect to see in your local neighborhood if the worst happens.

10 13 11 flagbar


Americans Sense of Freedom Plummets


by WashingtonsBlog

Problems Are All Related …

Americans’ Sense of Freedom Plummets By 12% … Our Belief in “Widespread Corruption” In the U.S. Jumps 20% … and Our Trust in All 3 Branches of Government Hits Historic Lows

The Christian Science Monitor reports:

According to a new [Gallup] poll, Americans have become significantly “less satisfied with the freedom to choose what they want to do with their lives.”

Seventy-nine percent of US residents are satisfied with their level of freedom, down from 91 percent in 2006according to the Gallup survey, released Tuesday.

That 12-point drop pushes the United States from among the highest in the world in terms of perceived freedom to 36th place, outside the top quarter of the 120 countries sampled, trailing Paraguay, Rwanda, and the autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabakh [part of Azerbaijan].

Only 10 nations experienced as sharp a drop as the US in terms of the satisfaction of citizens with their level of freedom: Egypt, Greece, Italy, Venezuela, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Romania, Yemen, Pakistan, and Spain.

(We highlighted countries not especially known for their freedom.)

At the same time, the percentage of Americans who believe there is “widespread corruption” in the U.S. has skyrocketed. As the Monitor notes:

According to another poll also released by Gallup on Tuesday, the portion of Americans who believe there to be “widespread corruption” in the US has jumped from 59 percent in 2006 to 79 percent in 2013.

And Americans trust in all 3 branches of government are plunging to historic lows. The Washington Times reports:

Americans’ confidence in all three branches of U.S. government is falling, hitting record lows for the Supreme Court, at 30 percent, and Congress, at 7 percent, while the presidency is at a six-year low of 29 percent.

Since June 2013, confidence has fallen 7 points for the presidency, 4 points for the Supreme Court and 3 points for Congress.

A new poll finds that Obama is now more unpopular than Bush … and the least popular president since WWII.  The Washington Times notes:

A new Quinnipiac University survey found that voters rate Mr. Obama as the country’s worst president since World War II.

Quinnipiac found 45 percent of voters say the country would have been better off if Mr. Romney had been elected, while just 38 percent say Mr. Obama remains a better choice. Even Democrats aren’t so sure — just 74 percent of them told the pollsters Mr. Obama was clearly the better pick in the last election.

A Zogby Analytics Poll released Wednesday also found Mr. Obama slipping — in that survey, to 44 percent approval, while his disapproval jumped 4 percentage points from last month to reach 54 percent.

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that only 16% of Americans have any real confidence in the government, only 19% have confidence in the media, and only 13% have confidence in large corporations:

Of course, all of these poll results are related.  As Gallup points out:

Perceived widespread corruption in the U.S. government could be on the rise for several reasons, including the significant media attention on issues such as the IRS targeting of conservative groups and National Security Agency leaks. Americans not only feel that the U.S. government is performing poorly, as demonstrated by record-low congressional approval ratings, but they also report that the U.S. government itself as one of the biggest problem facing the country today.

Indeed, we’ve been reporting on these connections for years:

Militarization of our police


By Michael Webster

Laguna Journal

“In other words, the twenty-first-century war on terror has melded thoroughly with the twentieth-century war on drugs, and the result couldn’t be anymore disturbing: police forces that increasingly look and act like occupying armies…”

The direction being achieved by militarizing our cops is to train them to be an occupying force under the control of the Federal government and its minions instead of being our friendly public servant  whose job was once to “serve and protect”.

As most Americans firmly oppose the current morphing of local police from protects and serves and community policing to federally militarized and federally subsidized occupying force.

In the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, Mo., an unarmed 18-year-old black man was killed by police in broad daylight.
By now, what’s happening in Ferguson is about so many second-order issues— the militarization of police with systemic racism, and how citizens can redress grievances, among other things—that it’s worth remembering what actually happened…

Last week Ferguson was sending shock waves across America and around the world. Many viewers first tuning into the national news thought they were observing a 3rd world riot that we so often see coming from places like the Middle East, Russia, China or some out of control banana republic. No these pictures were coming from Ferguson Missouri in the heartland of America. We as Americans need to examine the problem of the militarization of our police.

Dr, Edwin Vieira, Jr. writes in his new book that we now have a choice to make – do we want to continue to live in a police state, or do we do something about it.
As Karl Bickel, a senior policy analyst with the Justice Department’s Community Policing Services office, observes, police across America are being trained in a way that emphasizes force and aggression. He notes that recruit training favors a stress-based regimen that’s modeled on military boot camp rather than on the more relaxed academic setting a minority of police departments still employ. The result, he suggests, is young officers who believe policing is about kicking ass rather than working with the community to make neighborhoods safer. Or as comedian Bill Maher reminded officers recently:

“The words on your car, ‘protect and serve,’ refer to us, not you.”
This authoritarian streak runs counter to the core philosophy that supposedly dominates twenty-first-century American thinking: community. Its emphasis is on a mission of “keeping the peace” by creating and maintaining partnerships of trust with and in the communities served. Under the community model, which happens to be the official policing philosophy of the U.S. government, officers are protectors but also problem solvers who are supposed to care, first and foremost, about how their communities see them. They don’t command respect, the theory goes: they earn it.

Fear isn’t supposed to be their currency. Trust is.

Nevertheless, police recruiting videos, as in those from California’s Newport Beach Police Department and New Mexico’s Hobbs Police Department, actively play up not the community angle but militarization as a way of attracting young men with the promise of Army-style adventure and high-tech toys. Policing, according to recruiting videos like these, isn’t about calmly solving problems; it’s about you and your boys breaking down doors in the middle of the night.
SWAT’s influence reaches well beyond that. Take the increasing adoption of battle-dress uniforms (BDUs) for patrol officers. These militaristic, often black, jumpsuits, Bickel fears, make them less approachable and possibly also more aggressive in their interactions with the citizens they’re supposed to protect…

Take the 1033 program. The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) may be an obscure agency within the Department of Defense, but through the 1033 program, which it oversees, it’s one of the core enablers of American policing’s excessive militarization. Beginning in 1990, Congress authorized the Pentagon to transfer its surplus property free of charge to federal, state, and local police departments to wage the war on drugs. In 1997, Congress expanded the purpose of the program to include counter-terrorism in section 1033 of the defense authorization bill.

In one single page of a 450-page law, Congress helped sow the seeds of today’s warrior cops.
The amount of military hardware transferred through the program has grown astronomically over the years. In 1990, the Pentagon gave $1 million worth of equipment to U.S. law enforcement. That number had jumped to nearly $450 million in 2013. Overall, the program has shipped off more than $4.3 billion worth of material to state and local cops, according to the DLA.

In its recent report, the ACLU found a disturbing range of military gear being transferred to civilian police departments nationwide. Police in North Little Rock, Arkansas, for instance, received 34 automatic and semi-automatic rifles, two robots that can be armed, military helmets, and a Mamba tactical vehicle. Police in Gwinnet County, Georgia, received 57 semi-automatic rifles, mostly M-16s and M-14s. The Utah Highway Patrol, according to a Salt Lake City Tribune investigation, got an MRAP from the 1033 program, and Utah police received 1,230 rifles and four grenade launchers. After South Carolina’s Columbia Police Department received its very own MRAP worth $658,000, its SWAT Commander Captain E.M. Marsh noted that 500 similar vehicles had been distributed to law enforcement organizations across the country.
Astoundingly, one-third of all war material parceled out to state, local, and tribal police agencies is brand new. This raises further disconcerting questions: Is the Pentagon simply wasteful when it purchases military weapons and equipment with taxpayer dollars? Or could this be another downstream, subsidized market for defense contractors? Whatever the answer, the Pentagon is actively distributing weaponry and equipment made for U.S. counterinsurgency campaigns abroad to police who patrol American streets and this is considered sound policy in Washington. The message seems striking enough: what might be necessary for Kabul might also be necessary for DeKalb County.

In other words, the twenty-first-century war on terror has melded thoroughly with the twentieth-century war on drugs, and the result couldn’t be anymore disturbing: police forces that increasingly look and act like occupying armies…
American cops are the best trained and best financed in the world. however, only a mere few honor the oath they all have taken to protect and serve, and the concern by many is that the current-serving cops who will honor their Oath to the Constitution may be penalized for doing so. What we saw in Pittsburgh in 2009 and in Ferguson, Missouri are signs of the times. As Dr. Vieira points out, perhaps we’d be wise to reinstate the Constitutional “Militia of the several States“, just as the Constitution requires.
Some Americans question whether a standing police force is or is not a constitutionally lawful entity.
The direction being achieved by militarizing our cops is to train them to be an occupying force under the control of the Federal government and its minions instead of being our friendly public servant whose job was once to “serve and protect”.

Laguna journal
Justice Department’s Community Policing Services office ]
The Bastardy of Martial Law
Oath keepers
Related Article:
Why are Law enforcement requesting armored vehicles by by Michael Webster

Michael Webster Syndicated Investigative Reports are read worldwide, in 100 or more U.S. outlets and in at least 136 countries and territories. He publishes articles in association with global news agencies and media information services with more than 350 news affiliates in 136 countries.
He served as a trustee on trade Union funds. A noted Author, Lecturer, Educator, Emergency Manager, Counter-Terrorist, War on Drugs and War on Terrorist Specialist, Newspaper Publisher. Radio News caster. Labor Law generalist, Teamster Union Business Agent, General Organizer, Union Rank and File Member Grievances Representative, NLRB Union Representative, Union Contract Negotiator, Workers Compensation Appeals Board Hearing Representative. Mr. Webster represented management on that side of the table as the former Director of Federated of Nevada. Mr. Webster publishes on-line newspapers at and http://www.usborderfirereport.comand does investigative reports for print, electronic and on-line News Agencies. Mr. Webster is a four star general with the United States Civil Defense Assoc. At:

10 13 11 flagbar


Wake Up! Its Hit The Fan! FEMA, Martial Law, Oops Leaked Info, You’re Not Supposed to Know


Lisa Haven

We have all heard the anaolgy of the frog in the kettle but is there any truth to that tail? When a frog is placed in a pot of cool water, which is slowly heated, will it boil to death or leap out to save its life? As it turns out, once the water gets hot enough the critter will hop out of Dodge.

At what point will America finally ‘hop out of Dodge?’ Will the continuous growth and intrusiveness of government make the people wake up? Or will they sit in the kettle of hot water boiling to death?

Since Obama’s presidency he has successfully brought America to her knees in debt and destroyed her economy. FEMA camps have gone up across the nation and NSA spying has become an accepted norm of society. When are we going to wake up? Will it be too late? Or will we be like the frog in the kettle jumping out at the boiling point…

“But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you, delivering you to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for My name’s sake.” Luke 21:12

8-18-2014 12-41-55 PM

8-18-2014 12-42-21 PM

8-18-2014 12-42-46 PM

Here is the a list of executive orders:

Executive Order 10997 (grants government control over electric, gas, and minerals)

The verbiage states: “SECTION 1. Scope. The Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering (1) electric power; (2) petroleum and gas; (3) solid fuels; and (4) minerals. These plans and programs shall be designed to provide a state of readiness in these resource areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.” EO 10997

Executive Order 10998 (grants government control over food and farms)

The verbiage states: “SECTION 1. Scope. The Secretary of Agriculture (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering: Food resources, farm equipment, fertilizer, and food resource facilities, as defined below; rural fire control; defense against biological warfare, chemical warfare, and radiological fallout pertaining to agricultural activities; and rural defense information and education. These plans and programs shall be designed to develop a state of readiness in these areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.” EO 10998

Executive Order 10990 (grants government control over labor)

The verbiage reads: “The President is authorized by the Act to establish by Executive order a safety council composed of representatives of Government departments and agencies to serve as an advisory body to the Secretary of Labor in furtherance of the safety program carried out by the Secretary pursuant to section 33 of the Act and to undertake such other measures as he deems proper to prevent injuries and accidents to persons covered by the Act.” EO 10990

Executive Order 10995 (grants government control over communications and media)

The verbiage states: “SEC. 2. Subject to the authority and control of the President, the Director of Telecommunications Management shall:

(a) Coordinate telecommunications activities of the executive branch of the Government and be responsible for the formulation, after consultation with appropriate agencies, of overall policies and standards therefor. He shall promote and encourage the adoption of uniform policies and standards by agencies authorized to operate telecommunications systems. Agencies shall consult with the Director of Telecommunications Management in the development of policies and standards for the conduct of their telecommunications activities within the overall policies of the executive branch.

SEC. 3. The authority to assign radio frequencies to Government agencies, vested in the President by section 305 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. 305),including all functions heretofore vested in the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee, is hereby delegated to the Director of the Office of Emergency Planning, who may redelegate such authority to the Director of Telecommunications Management. Such authority shall include the power to amend, modify, or revoke frequency assignments.” EO 10995

Executive Order 10999 (grants government control over transportation, highways, seaports, waterways)

The verbiagestates: “SECTION 1. Scope. The Secretary of Commerce (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering:

(a) Development and coordination of over-all policies, plans, and procedures for the provision of a centralized control of all modes of transportation in an emergency for the movement of passenger and freight traffic of all types, and the determination of the proper apportionment and allocation of the total civil transportation capacity, or any portion thereof, to meet over-all essential civil and military needs.

(b) Federal emergency operational responsibilities with respect to: highways, roads, streets, bridges, tunnels, and appurtenances; highway traffic regulation; allocation of air carrier aircraft for essential military and civilian operations; ships in coastal and intercoastal use and ocean shipping, ports and port facilities; and the Saint Lawrence Seaway; except those elements of each normally operated or controlled by the Department of Defense.” EO 10999

Executive Order 11000 (grants government control to mobilize civilians into work brigades under their supervision)

The verbiage states: ” SECTION 1. Scope. The Secretary of Labor (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering civilian manpower mobilization, more effective utilization of limited manpower resources including specialized personnel, wage and salary stabilization, worker incentives and protection, manpower resources and requirements, skill development and training, research, labor-management relations, and critical occupations. These plans and programs shall be designed to develop a state of readiness in these areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.” EO 11000

Executive Order 11001 (grants government control over health, education and welfare)

The verbiage states: ” SECTION 1. Scope. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering health services, civilian health manpower, health resources, welfare services, and educational programs as defined below. These plans and programs shall be designed to develop a state of readiness in these areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency including attack upon the United States.” EO 11001

Executive Order 11002 (grants government control over postmaster and creates a national registration of all persons)

The verbiage states: ” SECTION 1. Scope. The Postmaster General shall assist in the development of a national emergency registration system. These plans and programs shall be designed to develop a state of readiness in this area with respect to all conditions of national emergency including attack upon the United States.”  EO 11002

Executive Order 11003 (grants government control over airports, airways, and aviation)

The verbiage states: ” ECTION 1. Scope. The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency (hereinafter referred to as the Administrator) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering the emergency management of the Nation’s civil airports, civil aviation operating facilities, civil aviation services, and civil aircraft other than air carrier aircraft. These plans and programs shall be designed to develop a state of readiness in these areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.” EO 11003

Executive Order 11004 (create new locations for population, relocate communities, designate areas to be abandoned)

The verbiage states: ” SECTION 1. Scope. The Housing and Home Finance Administrator (hereinafter referred to as the Administrator) shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering all aspects of lodging or housing and community facilities related thereto. These plans and programs shall be designed to develop a state of readiness in these areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.

SEC. 2. Housing Functions. The Administrator shall:

(b) Communities. Develop plans for the selection, acquisition, development, and disposal of areas for civilian uses in new, expanded, restored, or relocated communities; and for the construction of housing for new or restored communities.” EO 11004

Executive Order 11005 (grants government control over railroads, public storage facilities, and shipping)

The verbiage states: ” SECTION 1. Scope. The Interstate Commerce Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission shall prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs covering railroad utilization, reduction of vulnerability, maintenance, restoration, and operation in an emergency; motor carrier utilization, reduction of vulnerability, and operation in an emergency; inland waterway mutilization of equipment and shipping, reduction of vulnerability, and operation in an emergency, excepting the St. Lawrence Seaway; and also provide guidance and consultation to domestic surface transportation and storage industries, as defined below, regarding emergency preparedness measures, and to States regarding development of their transportation plans in assigned areas. These plans and programs will be designed to develop a state of readiness in these areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.” EO 11005

Executive Order 11051 (gives authorization to put all executive orders into effect in times of increased international tensions,  economic and financial crisis)

The verbiage states: “ECTION 101. Resume of responsibilities. The Director of the Office of Emergency Planning (hereinafter referred to as the Director) shall:

(a) Advise and assist the President in the coordination of and in the determination of policy for the emergency plans and preparedness assignments of the Federal departments and agencies (hereinafter referred to as Federal agencies) designed to make possible at Federal, State and local levels the mobilization of the human, natural and industrial resources of the nation to meet all conditions of national emergency, including attack on the United States.

(b) Under the direction of the President, be responsible for the preparation of nonmilitary plans and preparedness programs with respect to organization and functioning of the Federal Government under emergency conditions and with respect to specific areas of Federal activity necessary in time of war which are neither performed in the normal operations of the regular departments and agencies nor assigned thereto by or under the authority of the President.” EO 11051

Executive Order 11921 (allows FEMA to develop plans to establish control over money. Additionally it states that congress cannot review the action for 6 months, meaning it will last at least that long!)

You can also find these Executive Orders in the Government National Archive.

10 13 11 flagbar




By Professor Steven Yates

August 16, 2014

Part 13: Weaponized Terms and Official Narratives

“The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around. What do you see? Business people, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy…. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.” ~Morpheus, The Matrix

[Author’s note: recent weeks have seen the appearance of attack-dog articles, e.g., this hit piece on “conspiracy theories” that appeared in Newsweek, or this wretched screed against Austrian school economics Their authors’ certainty that supporters of such are deluded fools or worse is exceeded only by the paucity of the arguments presented. Clearly, neither author read or spoke to anyone who advocates the ideas attacked. But these articles do offer a gold-mine of examples for those interested in how language is used to caricature or mislead. The one on “conspiracy theories,” however, can applauded for its back-handed honesty on one point: “conspiratorial thinking” easily begins by questioning a government account. The author quotes an “expert”: “One of the most common ways of introducing a conspiracy theory is to ‘just ask questions’ about an official account…. It’s a quite powerful rhetorical tool because it doesn’t require any content, just the introduction of doubt about an official story.”

In other words, you’re not supposed to question “your” government. You are supposed to suspend your critical thinking skills and accept its pronouncements on its own authority.

There is even an imitation-Wikipedia site, calling itself “Rationalwiki” [sic.], with an entry on—are you sitting down?—“JAQing off”! “JAQing” stands for “just asking questions,” verbally invoking a not-exactly-subliminal image of a certain personal sex act. One would think adults to be above such crudities, but when comfort zones and worldviews are at stake, I suppose not.

It is as if someone—maybe more than one someone who identifies with power—is very worried about the number of people out here in the boonies who are “unplugging,” or at least paying attention to those “just asking questions.” Some obviously well educated and articulate folks have now “taken the red pill,” awakened in the Desert of the Real, and are trying to awaken others before the roof caves in.

In case this continuing series falls into the hands of the exceptionally dense as did its ancestor in a few cases, I trust it is clear to adult readers that I am using phrases like Real Matrix and Desert of the Real allegorically. If you don’t know what an allegory is, look it up. I mention this because an idiot where I used to live once posted an online criticism of me that opined: Yates “believes the Matrix is real.” I’m not joking.]

Friday, November 22, 1963 was a bleak day for the country. On that day, of course, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated as he rode in a motorcade in Dallas. John Connally, riding in the same vehicle, was also injured in the attack.

Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested in a nearby theater. He denied shooting Kennedy and claimed to have been a patsy.

Two days later, while Oswald was about to be taken from police headquarters to the county jail, Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby make his way through the assembled crowd and and shot him at point blank range in front of TV cameras. Oswald was dead at the scene.

The Warren Commission Report contended after a year-long inquiry that Oswald had acted alone. But doubts had already surfaced, and would continue. Some alleged that Kennedy had made powerful enemies in the CIA and the FBI—as he’d begun thawing the Cold War, trying to open up a dialogue with the Soviets. He’d nixed an infamous scheme called Operation Northwoods: a series of would-have-been false flag events to be blamed on Cuba, as the pretext for an invasion to bring down Castro’s regime.

Others looked at the Federal Reserve. Allegedly, Kennedy had signed an executive order (EO 11110) that would have replaced Federal Reserve Notes with Silver Certificates issued by the government, although this interpretation of that order is dubious. Kennedy had spoken out against “secret societies”—or so we are told by some (again, one can question that interpretation of this infamous speech)—or perhaps we should listen to this one from earlier in 1963 which surely angered the higher powers in what Eisenhower had called the military-industrial complex.

Still others have trained suspicious eyes on Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon B. Johnson. Johnson hated the Kennedys. The feeling was mutual. The only reason Johnson had been on the 1960 ballot was to win Texas for the Democrats. Johnson wanted to be President, so he’d accepted the arrangement. Would he have masterminded a highly visible assassination of a popular president knowing the devastating (not just to himself but to the country) consequences if he was found out?

I don’t know. I don’t consider the Kennedy assassination to be in the purview of my expertise. I was six years old, and hardly in a position to follow the discussions and controversies which ensued. I do recall it was the first time I saw my mother cry. An intelligent woman who gave me books to read in my childhood and introduced me to the world of current events, she would tell me late in her life that as far as she was concerned, Kennedy was the last statesman to occupy that office.

I grew up aware that something terrible had happened to the very fabric of the country that day, and that a few stubborn voices alleged that there was more to the story than government and mainstream media were allowing. Some based their claims on the idea that the purported trajectory of the “magic bullet” that allegedly came from a sixth floor window, killed Kennedy, and then wounded Connolly would have violated the laws of physics, and that autopsy details were covered up to protect an official story. There were added allegations that Oswald was not a good enough shot to have taken out Kennedy from that far away, and that he had been seen elsewhere at the time of the shooting, meaning that (unless he could be in two places at once) he couldn’t have been the shooter.

Nothing has been proven decisively. But the phrase “conspiracy theory” crept into the public lexicon—to become what is now being described as a weaponized term—a phrase used to discredit a priori, without the perceived need for a rational response. The trained philosopher in me became fascinated some years ago with how language can be used to communicate information or to misdirect, mislead, bully, and control.

For starters, historian Richard Hofstadter’s influential essay “The Paranoid Style in American Politics” appeared almost exactly one year after the Kennedy Assassination, alongside the Warren Commission Report. Hofstadter’s weaponized term was paranoid style rather than conspiracy theory. Among his targets were the Goldwater movement and the John Birch Society. He also discussed McCarthyism and anti-Catholicism. His title was prescient. If you are associated with any of these, you are “paranoid,” i.e., suffering from mild mental derangement. Diagnosis and healing are called for. Rational response is not. With this essay, required reading for those seeking to understand how the Real Matrix got programmed, Hofstadter set a precedent.

Not as well known is that the CIA had began using the phrase conspiracy theory. It’s 1035-960 document dated 1 April 1967 was sent exclusively to top mainstream media outlets. This document was obtainable through FOIA requests but not released to the public until 1996. It decried skepticism about the official version of President Kennedy’s death. It went on to complain that “[c]onspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of conspiracy theorists …” It recommended “employ[ing] propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics [of the Warren Commission Report].”

Mass media began using the term. It stuck, and indeed made a formidable weapon, one hard to defend against—even as similar allegations appeared following other tragic events of that decade. For example, there are claims that government accounts of the assassinations of Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. do not fit reports by eye-witnesses. Sirhan Sirhan—possibly drugged and mind-controlled—had no memory of any shooting. James Earl Ray confessed, but retracted his confession and consistently denied shooting King up to his death in prison from liver disease in 1998. Ray, we should make clear, was a criminal with a substantial track record, and on the lam at the time of the shooting; but this isn’t proof he killed King. Why he initially confessed isn’t clear, but today, even surviving members of the King family have doubts about his guilt.

Some conspiracy claims have turned out to be uncontroversially true. Their place in history is such that no one calls them that. Watergate is the obvious case. Then there was Iran-Contra in the 1980s. Claims that did not make headlines involved a CIA project known as MK-Ultra. This project experimented with LSD and mind control. The official claim is that MK-Ultra was discontinued long ago. Others aren’t so sure.

In 1995, allegations surfaced rather quickly that there were problems with the official account of the Oklahoma City Bombing. They ranged from the claim that a truck bomb couldn’t have caused the level of damage sustained by the Murrah Federal Building, that BATF officials who had an office in the building were mysteriously not at work that day, implying that someone had tipped them off, that witnesses had heard two explosions which were also recorded by seismographs at the University of Oklahoma, and so on. Federal officials have videos which survived the bombing and would show McVeigh exiting the Ryder truck, and also reveal whether he was alone or in the company of others. They refuse to release this material. I’ve summarized the issues here.

By this time we had the Internet, of course. Internet-based media would prove its worth when Drudge broke the Monica Lewinsky story which mainstream media had spiked, as it had largely spiked Bill Clinton’s dalliances with and sometimes abuses of other women. Once these were exposed, the silence of radical feminists was damning to that movement, which was about ideology, not justice for women.

These all predated the 9/11 attacks, by any measure a turning point. I am not concerned to sort out whose theories are most likely true, and I am not going to recount the difficulties (logistic, physical, etc.) with the official narrative that the federal government and mainstream media almost immediately put in place. This has been adequately done by others—and it is worth noting that many who have studied the best first hand accounts of what happened that morning became 9/11 skeptics (a word I prefer to the weaponized term truthers).

What I am interested in is the fact of an official narrative in all these cases. An official narrative is an account of some dramatic event, be it an assassination or bombing or mass shooting, sanctioned by government, loyally reported by mainstream media, usually over and over because repetition is known to cement a narrative in the minds of listeners. Weaponized terms are then employed to protect it from questions and criticism.

That Oswald, a lone gunman with a grudge, shot Kennedy from that sixth floor window, is then the official narrative of the 1963 assassination. That Sirhan Sirhan, another loner, shot his brother five years later; and that James Earl Ray murdered King, are the official narratives of those events. The same is true for Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols regarding the Oklahoma City Bombing; Osama bin Laden having masterminded the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon from a cave somewhere in Afghanistan whereby 19 Saudis with boxcutters hijacked four planes that morning; and Obama having masterminded the Navy Seals assault on a compound in Pakistan where bin Laden was said to be hiding, taking him out on May 2, 2011 followed by his burial at sea—a sequence of events for which there are no surviving witnesses who saw a body or other physical evidence, and in which again there are eye-witnesses who have a quite different account of what happened.

We can isolate official narratives for other recent events: the so-called Batman shooter in the theater in Aurora, Colo. (called that because it occurred on the opening night of a Batman movie), the accused being a former Ph.D. student named James Holmes; the Sandy Hook Elementary School case in Newtown, Conn., where we are told that the shooter was a 20-year-old Aspergers sufferer named Adam Lanza; and the Boston Marathon Bombing, following which an entire city was placed under de facto martial law while militarized law enforcement tracked down 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, whose older brother had been killed amidst a flurry of conflicting and self-contradictory reports.

In each of these cases there are factors and details that to an alert mind, do not add up. For example, in the case of the Batman shooter, police learned (from Holmes himself) that Holmes’s apartment had been booby-trapped with explosives—some quite advanced and with major destructive power, for example a trip wire set to unleash an explosion when the front door was opened. Somehow he’d obtained close to $20,000 worth of equipment. It took a crew most of one day to use robots to disarm them sufficiently to gain access to Holmes’s apartment—after which they detonated the building, conveniently destroying all possibility of follow-up on-the-scenes investigation by independent researchers.

How credible is it that James Holmes, a Ph.D. student in the process of withdrawing from his program at the University of Colorado’s medical school, planned and carried out these shootings?

I was once a Ph.D. student and can certify—countless graduate students would back me up on this point, I imagine—Ph.D. students are notoriously poor. So where does this Ph.D. student obtain between $15,000 and $20,000 both for the gear he allegedly was wearing when he did the shooting and the devices used to booby-trap his apartment? Holmes’s subject was neuroscience. Where did he get the skills necessary to pull off a stunt like this?

Moreover: what could have been his motive? Those who knew him did not report any grievances he supposedly harbored, or any special interest in politics. A person doesn’t just wake up one day and decide he is going to wire his apartment with explosives and go on a shooting spree targeting strangers in a theater. No one has ever suggested a credible motive for the heinous act attributed to Holmes. To say that he was crazy isn’t an answer, because even the behavior of so-called crazy people is subject to cause and effect. A few have pointed to his father, Robert Holmes, a mathematical genius with a Ph.D. in statistics. The senior Holmes had developed predictive models for the global banking community based on some of the most sophisticated computer algorithms ever devised. One result is that he allegedly had the know-how to trace trillions of dollars that had simply disappeared, to the point of being able to locate their present account-holders. This made him potentially very dangerous! It was rumored that he was on the list of possible witnesses to be called to testify about the LIBOR scandal before a U.S. Senate committee. To the best of my knowledge, he never has testified. Was he told something along the lines of, “You keep quiet, and we’ll see to it that your kid’s life is spared”? We don’t know, of course, but what are the odds of all this being coincidental?

Adam Lanza’s father, Peter Lanza, was also involved with the global financial corporatist octopus that is strangling the Anglo-European world. Coincidence on top of coincidence?

I’m “just asking questions,” of course—reasonable when we have official narratives that don’t add up to anything that makes rational sense. So what is the reality in these cases? Again, I don’t know, and I’m not sure anyone else does, either—except whichever sociopaths planned these events and carried them out. As those who saw the coverage know, James Holmes was found by police sitting in his vehicle in a daze, in which he seemed to remained long afterwards, making the (by now familiar) claim of not remembering anything and wondering what he was doing in jail.

Regarding the Sandy Hook case, a long-time school safety consultant, educator, and one-time law enforcement officer named Wolfgang Halbig began his own investigation after offering assistance as an authority on school safety and quickly sensing something amiss. His list of questions is telling. These should be easily answerable from publicly available records if that event happened as the official narrative says it did. Halbig now contends he has in his possession 11,000 pages of documentation, courtesy of Connecticut state troopers who for obvious reasons chose to remain anonymous, proving beyond all reasonable doubt that Sandy Hook was a scripted event. Why would anyone do such a thing? We find the answer in that Connecticut now has one of the most restrictive gun control laws on the books, and has threatened to turn tens of thousands of gun owners into felons for refusing to register or turn in their firearms. These and other shootings, some real and others possibly scripted, have enabled gun-grabbers to gain ground.

We’ve discussed weaponized terms. Another ruse to sabotage skepticism towards official narratives is to link evidence-based questioning to outrageous claims and clearly irrational postures. Some of these are easily exposed, e.g., the forum troll who retorts to a questioner of, e.g., the official 9/11 narrative, if he also believes the moon landings were faked. Note that the retort is unrelated to the topic at hand. This is a dead giveaway that one is dealing with a troll. There is solid evidence that some of these people are paid by the government to post sarcastic comments on forums and blogs, or otherwise disrupt online discussions of controversial events.

The problem is occasionally larger than someone simply being disruptive. One can find authors, both online and in print, whose articles and even books weave elaborate tales of, e.g., reptilian space aliens disguised as humans, or of how holograms were used to simulate planes hitting the Twin Towers. One suspects that some of these people—I won’t name names—are paid disinformation artists whose purpose is to make independent investigation look foolish through guilt by association, or possibly just to further confuse a public that doesn’t know what to believe. The point is, investigators not tied to government or corporate media are questioning official narratives presented by government to explain or account for numerous recent events, going back at least to the Kennedy Assassination up to Sandy Hook, which don’t add up for specific, concrete reasons. The questioners typically don’t have a specific theory, and aren’t pointing fingers at a specific group—aside, of course, from implying that someone in or close to government has something to hide, and that mainstream media is covering for them. Surprise, surprise.

In a few cases, actual threats have ensued when a questionioner kept pushing. Wolfgang Halbig reports that he received visits from government officials threatening him with felony charges if he didn’t cease and desist. He has pressed ahead, encountered stonewalling and even physical bullying in Newtown, Conn.; although no charges have been filed against him, at least not yet. Halbig has credibility, of course, and the publicity a court battle might generate would be more difficult to contain than skepticism about an official narrative.

These narratives seem intended to further goals within the Desert of the Real (e.g., disarming the citizenry) at a time when the Real Matrix is coming under increased strain due to the ready availability of uncensored and unvetted information on the Web. The majority still take official narratives for granted, of course. A rising minority does not. This minority has been able to wrap its collective brain around the idea that those with real power really are sociopaths who have no qualms about murdering thousands of people in order to wage war and work towards global tyranny. This minority and its influence must be neutered. Hence weaponized terms, which paralyze people. Who, after all, wants to be branded as paranoid, or as a “kook”? Other terms I often see are “right wing nut job” (often abbreviated RWNJ), or just “wing nut,” “teabagger,” or the more menacing “domestic terrorist,” “domestic extremist,” or “anti-government hate group,” favorites of the far left Southern Poverty Law Center whom mainstream writers often cite as if it were an objective, nonpartisan authority. Seldom do I see such hate-filled language applied to leftists.

In fact, the few academics with tenure who have undertaken the kinds of studies suggested here—studies in how media in particular are used to entrench an official narrative in the minds of television viewers while offering alternative accounts—find themselves in fights to keep their jobs. Ask Professor James F. Tracy, of Florida International University, whose specialty is media manipulation and whose questioning of several official narratives brought down on his head the wrath of those “dependent on the system and willing to fight to protect it.”

This all aligns with how official narratives, whether of such events as a 9/11 or of the larger movements of history or of the general worldview on which much of contemporary science and scholarship rests, are kept in place in a corporatist political economy. Most of those defending various aspects of this worldview cannot even identify it clearly, much less supply cogent arguments in its defense. They assume it, and will invoke generalities about “rationality,” a concept about which philosophers are far from agreeing. The problem: complex physical evidence can be organized in different ways, and point one’s reasoning in more than one direction, depending on (usually unstated) philosophical assumptions. We will see how this has affected the overall worldview of Western civilization that underwrites the corporatist Real Matrix and the damage it has caused in the Desert of the Real.

Next: The Materialist Matrix.

Click here for part —–>  123456789,1011121314,

© 2014 Steven Yates – All Rights Reserved

Steven Yates has a doctorate in philosophy and currently lives in Santiago, Chile. He is the author of Four Cardinal Errors: Reasons for the Decline of the American Republic (Brush Fire Press International, 2011). He also owns an editing business, Final Draft Editing Service.

Steven Yates’s new ebook is entitled: Philosophy Is Not Dead: A Vision of the Discipline’s Future.


10 13 11 flagbar



By Servando Gonzalez
August 15, 2014

You lost the Cold War, get over it. —CFR agent John Kerry to Russians

Some Council on Foreign Relations’ secret agents are frantically calling for the beginning of a new Cold War with Russia. Unfortunately, most of America’s enemies in both branches of the Repucratic Party as well as some misguided patriots are very happy with the idea. Apparently they don’t realize that, despite disinformation on the contrary the Cold War actually was the most peaceful time in America’s recent history, because it was a carefully planed hoax. Actually, the Soviet Union was never a threat to the U.S. The USSR was nothing but an artificially created pseudo-enemy fully under the control of the CFR conspirators.

The creation of the USSR

The Soviet Union was an artificial creation of international bankers and oil magnates. Their purpose was to put Russia into an economic freezer —which they did for 60 long years— and curtail Tsar Nicholas intentions of turning the country into a major oil competitor in the free market.

The main problem the conspirators had with Russia, apart from its efforts to become and industrialized nation, was that the Russians had discovered a large amount of oil in Baku, near the Caspian Sea in Azerbaijan. At the time, the Baku oil field was considered the largest known oil deposit in the world. By the early 1880s, Russian crude production reached 10.8 million, almost a third of U.S. production.[1]

At the time, Tsar Nicholas II had initiated the implementation of a series of reforms directed to change Russia from a medieval into a modern society, which included the emancipation of the serfs, the creation of a Duma —a national assembly—, and rural communes. These reforms would have encouraged the Russian people to think about the possibility of a benign government in which the people would democratically participate.

But some influential Wall Street bankers and oil magnates were not happy with these changes in Russia, and conceived another plan. In order to proceed with their plan, John D. Rockefeller, together with fellow conspirators, like bankers Mellon and Morgan and steel magnate Andrew Carnegie, plus several of America’s robber barons, joined their resources for up to $50 million (an enormous sum at the time), and created the American International Corporation (AIC), a powerful cartel allegedly devoted to stimulate world trade. The truth, however, is that the AIC was created to fund the overthrow of Tsar Nicholas II by a small group of professional revolutionaries: the Bolsheviks.[2]

As expected, Rockefeller and his criminal associates of the American International Corporation (AIC), Andrew Mellon, J.P. Morgan and Andrew Carnegie, were deeply alarmed about the Russians challenging their ambitions of controlling the world oil supply, and they began conspiring to develop a plan to stop the Russians in their tracks.[3] They concluded that the only way to achieve their goal was to depose Czar Nicholas II, and the only way to accomplish that was through a “revolution.”

To this effect, between 1907 and 1910 the conspirators met several times with Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky, already living in exile in New York, and with Vladimir I. Lenin, another Russian revolutionary living in exile in Zurich. Eventually the arch-capitalists struck a deal with the arch-anti-capitalists: in exchange for financing their “revolution,” the capitalists would be allowed to have a hidden hand in designing the economy of what was soon to become the Soviet Union —allegedly the staunchest anti-capitalist nation in the world.

With the help of the conspirators, Lenin returned to Russia with plenty of gold in his famous “sealed” train, and, soon after Trotsky, under the protection of President Wilson and Colonel House, followed Lenin path with more gold. This gold made possible the Russian “revolution.”

So, contrary to common myth, the ones who had disseminated the Communist plague were bankers from England, Europe and the U.S., among them the Rothschild’s, Sir George Buchanan and Lord Alfred Milner (members of the Round Table, who had been instrumental in the creation of the CFR), the Warburg’s, the Rockefellers and J.P. Morgan. With their investment, the conspirators had created a pseudo-enemy they controlled —to some extent. Soon after, the Soviet Union became the bogeyman the conspirators used for many years as a credible threat to manipulate and control the U.S. and other Western countries. The rest is history.

The Globalist Conspirators Keep Artificially Alive the Monster They Have Created

The conspirators failed to foresee that Communism and Marxist economy are such a total disasters that, since the very beginning, the monster they had created never managed to provide for its own sustenance, and was always teetering on the verge of collapse. So, while ostensibly fighting to destroy it, they had to put all their ingenuity on keeping the Soviet communist monster artificially alive and kicking. To this effect, they injected it with trillions of dollars in aid.

In his massive scholarly work, Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, and later in his National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union, and finally in The Best Enemy Money Can Buy,[4] professor Antony Sutton extensively documented how, militarily, the Soviet Union was kept alive thanks to massive technology transfer, mostly from the United States. Moreover, this technology transfer was not the result of the good work of Soviet spies, but of the treachery of CFR agents at the highest levels of the U.S. government.

Probably the two most outstanding accomplishments of the CFR conspirators were giving the Soviets the technology for producing, first, nuclear weapons and, later, for building better intercontinental ballistic missiles.

According to the official story, Soviet spies Ethel and Julius Rosenberg stole and gave the Soviet Union in 1950 the scientific documents necessary to create an atomic bomb. But this is simply not true.[5] Most likely the Rosenberg’s, true Communist fanatics, ignored that their true role was paying with their lives to disinform the American people.]] The Soviets didn’t have to steal the atomic bomb secrets because CFR secret agents infiltrated into the U.S. government gave the information to them in 1943 disguised under the Lend Lease program.[6]

Actually the Rosenberg’s belonged to what Sun Tzu called “expendable agents,”[7] foolish spies designed to be caught. One of the uses of expendable agents is to distract the enemy’s attention from the real spies. The CFR conspirators at the highest levels of the U.S. government knew that the Rosenberg’s were fake spies —which perhaps explains Truman’s rush to destroy the evidence by callously ordering their unnecessary execution.

Professor Sutton has also documented in detail the second case, the willful transfer of American technology to make Soviet ICBMs more accurate.[8] According to Sutton, the threat of annihilation of the United States and the West by intercontinental Soviet nuclear missiles would have never existed,

If President Richard Nixon and National Security adviser Henry Kissinger had heeded warnings in 1970 from its own Department of Defense and outside experts that the Soviets were lagging in missile production technology and required specific technologies from the West to MIRV[9] their fourth generation ICBMs.[10]

Sutton failed to mention, however, that both Nixon and Kissinger were CFR members. They failed to pay attention to the warnings not because they were ignorant or fools, but because the conspirators’ plan required that, in order to make the Soviet threat more credible, they have to give them this advanced technology.

The CFR Conspirators Give Eastern Europe to the Communists

General William Donovan, the man who the Wall Street bankers and oil magnates selected to direct the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the US intelligence agency during WWII, was a millionaire Wall Street corporate lawyer. In 1929 he created his own law firm, Donovan, Leisure, Newton and Lumbard.

His right hand, Allen Dulles, was a Wall Street lawyer and senior member of the Rockefellers’ Council on Foreign Relations. Through his OSS office in Bern, Switzerland, Dulles kept an eye in the protection of the interests of CFR members. Sullivan & Cromwell, the law firm Dulles had worked for since 1926, had strong business ties with the I.G. Farben. It also represented the United Fruit Company and other Rockefellers’ interests. John Foster Dulles, Allen’s brother and partner in Sullivan & Cromwell, had close ties to Carmel Offie, William Bullitt, George Kennan, Paul Nitze and James Forrestal, all of them CFR agents or assets.

Most of the senior OSS members were secret CFR agents. Many of them later played important roles in the development of U.S. intelligence and national security policy for many decades.

Contrary to the prevalent myth, however, the OSS was not an intelligence agency working for the benefit of the American public. Actually it was the conspirators’ fifth column infiltrated into the U.S. armed forces to sabotage the efforts of true patriots like Patton to destroy the Nazi German war machine and win the war as soon as possible to save the lives of American soldiers.

But the CFR conspirators had other plans. Forced to fight the Nazi war machine because the monster they had contributed to create had turned into a Frankenstein’s monster, their secret plan was to substitute it with another monster they also had created: Soviet Russia.

It seems that the OSS’s true secret mission was to prevent the American military from winning the war too quickly and capture Nazi war criminals before the OSS provide ways for them to escape.[11] Their secondary mission was to make favorable conditions for the Soviets to get control over most of Eastern Europe. This perhaps explains why leftists and outright communist militants so extensively composed the OSS.

But there were some obstacles in the path of their plan. Despite of the fact that the CFR conspirators controlled a few senior Army officers like Eisenhower, Marshall and Ridgway, most of them were true American patriots who firmly believed that their mission was defeating the Nazis. Unfortunately, they were wrong. They ignored that the true goal of the war was protecting the conspirators’ investments in Germany and allowing the top Nazi criminals to escape justice.

At the time, not all ranking members of the U.S. military were under the control of the CFR conspirators, and Donovan immediately won several enemies, among them Major General George V. Strong, chief of the Army’s G-2, who openly expressed his lack of confidence in the new organization and proceeded to set up his own competing clandestine intelligence service.[12] Another enemy, probably most powerful than Gen. Strong, was J. Edgar Hoover, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI was the government agency responsible for counterespionage, and Hoover, who had been doing a good job, was protecting his turf.

While most of the American military men were risking their lives fighting what they considered a just war for the noble purpose of liberating Europe from the Nazi scourge, the conspirators’ secret army, the OSS, was working in the shadows to protect the conspirators’ interests in Germany and helping high rank Nazi leaders to escape to South America with the help of the Vatican. And Donovan and his OSS men were there, not only to protect the Nazis, but also to keep an eye on loyal American officers to see they could not accomplish too early what they considered their war mission: defeating the Nazis.

The fact that some OSS members were also true American patriots who firmly believed their main role was fighting the Nazis is irrelevant. They had been recruited under a false flag and, wittingly or unwittingly, were helping American pro-Nazis in the U.S. government to help the Nazi thugs avoid paying for their war crimes.

Since the very creation of the OSS, Donovan was criticized by his tendency to hire leftists, fellow travelers and outright militant communists. Donovan dismissed these criticisms by insisting that the sole objective of his organization was defeating the Axis powers. “I’d put Stalin on the OSS payroll if I thought it would help us defeat Hitler,” he told one of his assistants.[13] But the evidence shows that, for some reason, the OSS seemed to have a soft spot for Communists. Donovan himself was known for saying that political leftists were among the most valiant OSS field officers in his espionage and sabotage branches.[14] His most trusted aide, Duncan Lee, was later found to have been a KGB spy all the time.[15]

On one occasion, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover’s presented Donovan with dossiers containing factual evidence showing that three OSS employees had fought with the Abraham Lincoln Brigade during the Spanish Civil war and were affiliated with the Communist Party. When Hoover demanded their separation from the organization, Donovan dismissed the issue by answering, “I know they are Communists; that’s why I hired them.”[16]

It would be a mistake, however, to conclude that Donovan himself had any sympathy for leftists or communists. Following a policy carefully planned at the Harold Pratt House, the General was using leftists and communists as unwitting tools in preparation for the coming Cold War. Though in theory the OSS was simply an intelligence agency, it played an important role in helping the CFR conspirators implement their foreign policy decisions. As author R. Harris Smith noticed, the OSS was fully under the control of the CFR conspirators,

While Donovan diligently sought left-wing intellectuals and activists for the operational and research branches of the OSS, he saw no incongruity in appointing corporate attorneys and business executives as OSS administrators.[17]

© 2014 Servando Gonzalez – All Rights Reserved


  1. Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power, Part I (New York: Pocket Books, 1991), p. 59.
    2.John Christian Ryter, “The Secret Life of AIC,”, March 31, 2009.
    3. Ryter, op. cit.
    4. Antony C. Sutton, The Best Enemy Money Can Buy(Billings, Montana: Liberty House, 1986).
    5. Most likely the Rosenbergs, true Communist fanatics, ignored that their true role was paying with their lives for unwittingly allowing the U.S. government to disinform the American people.
    6. For a detailed account of the treachery see George Racey Jordan, From Major Jordan’s Diaries (Boston: Western Islands, 1965), pp. 72-106. Major Jordan’s accusations seem to have been substantiated many years later in a novel written in 1980 by Franklin Roosevelt’s son James Roosevelt. See, James Roosevelt A Family Matter (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1980).
    7. Sun Tzu, The Art of War [translated by Samuel B. Griffith] (London: Oxford University Press, 1963), p. 146.
    8. Sutton, The Best Enemy Money Can Buy, pp. 101-111.
    9. MIRV, the capability of an intercontinental missile to fire more than a single warhead.
    10. Sutton, op. cit., p. 101.
    11. Actually, this was not a difficult mission for the OSS. Most OSS officers had links to corporations that traded with the Nazis or had cartel agreements with German companies. For a detailed study of how the OSS helped Nazis avoid punishment, see, Thomas M. Bower, The Pledge Betrayed: America and Britain and the Degasification of Post-War Germany (New York: Doubleday, 1982), especially Part 4.
    12. Lyman Kirkpatrick, The Real CIA (New York: Macmillan, 1968), p. 15.
    13. R. Harris Smith, OSS: The Secret History of America’s First Intelligence Service (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972), p. 10.
    14. Ibid., p. 11.
    15. Robert Wilcox, Target Patton: The Plot to Assassinate General George S. Patton (Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2008), pp. 139-140.
    16. Smith, Ibid., p. 11. For detailed information about the OSS penetrated by leftists and Communists, see Smith, pp. 9-15.
    17. Ibid, p. 15.

Servando Gonzalez, is a Cuban-born American writer, historian, semiologist and intelligence analyst. He has written books, essays and articles on Latin American history, intelligence, espionage, and semiotics. Servando is the author of Historia herética de la revolución fidelistaObservandoThe Secret Fidel Castro: Deconstructing the SymbolThe Nuclear Deception: Nikita Khrushchev and the Cuban Missile Crisis and La madre de todas las conspiraciones: Una novela de ideas subversivas, all available at

He also hosted the documentaries Treason in America: The Council on Foreign Relations and Partners in Treason: The CFR-CIA-Castro Connection, produced by Xzault Media Group of San Leandro, California, both available at the author’s site at

His book, Psychological Warfare and the New World Order: The Secret War Against the American People is available at Or download a .pdf copy of the book you can read on your computer, iPad, Nook, Kindle or any other tablet. His book, OBAMANIA: The New Puppet and His Masters, is available at Servando’s book (in Spanish) La CIA, Fidel Castro, el Bogotazo y el Nuevo Orden Mundial, is available at and other bookstores online.

His most recent book, I Dare Call It treason: The Council on Foreign Relations and the Betrayal of the America, just appeared and is available at and other bookstores online.

Servando’s two most recent books in digital versions only are The Swastika and the Nazis: A Study of the Misuse of the Swastika by the Nazis and the first issue of the political satire series OBSERVANDO: American Inventors.



 10 13 11 flagbar

Order Out Of Chaos: The Doctrine That Runs The World


8-13-2014 5-37-26 PM

Brandon Smith
Activist Post

From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire. – Winston Churchill, February 1920, in an article that appeared in the Illustrated Sunday Herald
The concept of conspiracy frightens some people, so much so that they are willing to overlook any and all evidence that world events are for the most part directed, rather than chaotic and coincidental. For those who are uneducated and unaware, explanations for the terrible tides of politics and war generally revolve around a false understanding of Occam’s razor. They argue that the theory states that the “simplest explanation” is usually the correct one for any particular problem or crisis. But Occam’s razor actually states that the simplest explanation according to the evidence at hand is usually the correct answer for any given problem. That is to say, the simplest explanation must conform to the evidence, or it is likely not correct.

Unfortunately, “skeptics” of directed conspiracy often turn a blind eye to evidence that is contrary to their simple explanations, while arguing that simplification is its own vindication. In other words, they don’t feel the need to defend their simplistic worldview because, in their minds, simplicity stands on its own as self-evident. There was a time when men believed that the planets revolved around each other because they were tied together by long glass strings, and this was evident to them because it was the simplest explanation they could come up with. The thinking of skeptics of the New World Order and concerted globalization is much like this.

The most common argument they tend to exploit is that the world is far too “chaotic” and that if the elites are actually seeking a fully centralized one-world system, they are “failing miserably” because so many cultures are so clearly divided. For anyone who holds this argument as logical or practical, first I would suggest they look beyond the surface of the various conflicts at the similarities between these so called “enemies.”

For example, what about the United States versus Russia? These two nations have a long history of opposing ideologies and have come close to war time and time again. Certainly, average Americans see themselves as individualists and Russians as socialist or communist. Average Russians see Americans as capitalist imperialists and see themselves as humanists. But what about their respective governments? What about their respective financiers and oligarchs? Do they really see each other as enemies?

If that were so, then why did American Wall Street tycoons and the U.S. military aid the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917?

A false paradigm was created when internationalists supported the Bolshevik Revolution and allowed Russia to become a communist-held country. The eventual Cold War that resulted created the rationale used by the military-industrial complex to build a massive standing army (which is not part of the U.S. Constitution), an army which could then be sent around the world to subdue various nations and even possibly be used to oppress the American people.

Even today, the false East/West paradigm continues, with America painted as the bumbling villain and Russia painted as the stalwart and reasonable objector. Yet Russia’s top government officials and our top government officials work closely with and answer to the same international financiers and elites, like the International Monetary Fund and the Bank for International Settlements, as I outlined in great detail inFalse East/West Paradigm Hides The Rise Of Global Currency and Russia Is Dominated By Global Banks, Too.

Even closer to current events, the U.S. has now entered into military operations against ISIS insurgents moving rapidly through Iraq’s northern regions toward Baghdad. However, if ISIS is the enemy, why did the U.S. and our ally, Saudi Arabia, support and train ISIS agents in Syria as well as Iraq?

Is it just irony that our government helped birth ISIS and now the White House is at war with the group? Or is it possible that maybe, just maybe, a greater plan is afoot?

As the sinister Rahm Emanuel famously said: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

If a crisis of opportunity does not present itself in the time frame you need, why not ENGINEER a crisis to fit your goals? This is a tactic that has been used by elites for generations, and it is called the Hegelian dialectic.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s work was the very foundation of the collectivist/socialist ideology, and it inspired Karl Marx during his writing of The Communist Manifesto. Hegel was an avid statist who believed that the collective must be ruled and directed by centralized governance and that all individualism should be sacrificed for the greater good.

Hegel wrote that the state “has supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State… for the right of the world spirit is above all special privileges.”

In his dialectic theory, Hegel conjured a strategy by which the establishment elites could control the masses through deliberately created division. To define the Hegelian dialectic method simply, the ruling body must first trigger a problem or crisis that causes the citizenry to react with fear and demand a solution. The rulers then offer a solution, which they had already predetermined before they had started the crisis; this solution would usually entail more power for the elites and less freedom for the citizens.

The world appears divided and chaotic exactly because it has been MADE that way by a select few in the globalist establishment. In fact, if you were to name any war in the past 100 years, any competent alternative analyst would easily produce undeniable evidence of the involvement of international banks and think tanks pulling strings on both sides.

If you don’t understand the concept of “order out of chaos,” then you’ll never understand a thing.
Engineered chaos serves several purposes. It provides distraction and cover for the elites to implement other plans that they would rather not have noticed.

It also provides a scapegoat for the masses, who are now divided against each other. When violent changes are implemented that produce destructive consequences, the people must be placated with an easily identifiable villain. Certain changes globalists wish to make in the way the world functions require the careful exploitation of scapegoats.

For example, the globalists at the IMF have been discussing the establishment of a global basket currency for years to replace the U.S. dollar.

Russia and the East have also, conveniently, been calling for the IMF to replace the dollar with their Special Drawing Rights basket.

And finally, as well as conveniently, the elites in the U.S. government have launched a controlled coup in Ukraine and initiated direct economic confrontation with Russia, thereby giving the East the perfect excuse to dump the U.S. dollar as world reserve and replace it with a basket currency system under the IMF. Despite claims that Vladimir Putin is “anti-globalist,” the Russian is in fact an avid supporter of the IMF, and has stated his goal is to continue Russia’s IMF membership in a larger capacity:

In the BRICS case we see a whole set of coinciding strategic interests. First of all, this is the common intention to reform the international monetary and financial system. In the present form it is unjust to the BRICS countries and to new economies in general. We should take a more active part in the IMF and the World Bank’s decision-making system. The international monetary system itself depends a lot on the US dollar, or, to be precise, on the monetary and financial policy of the US authorities. The BRICS countries want to change this.

Yes, Vladimir, and so do the manipulative social engineers at the IMF…

Hopefully, you have the sense to see how this works: problem, reaction, solution. Economic or physical war is launched between East and West, while the dollar is killed in the process. The masses react by demanding a fair and balanced replacement for the dollar as world reserve so that economic stability can return. The Americans blame Russia and the East for their fiscal misfortune. The East blames the hubris of the West for its own downfall. Neither side blames the banksters, who started the whole calamity to begin with. And the elites swoop in as saviors with a new Bretton Woods-style agreement to appease all sides and cement their global currency system, the system they had always wanted. And with a global economic currency and authority in place, global governance is not far behind — order out of chaos.

This process is more psychological than political in its goals. One could argue that if the elites already have control of all central banks and governments, then why do they need a global government? The answer is that these men do not want secret global governance, they want open global governance. They want us to ACCEPT the idea as a fact of existence, for only when we agree to participate in the lie will they then have truly won.

The end result of World War I was the creation of the League of Nations and the argument that sovereignty leads to disunion and catastrophe. World War II led to the creation of the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund. I believe that a third world war is nearly upon us, one that may involve weapons of monetary destruction more so than weapons of mass destruction. Each supposed disintegration of global unity has eventually led to greater centralization, and this is something the skeptics seem to forget. The progression of crises suggests that the next war will lead to total globalization under the dominance of a minority of elitists posing as “wise men” who only wish to bring peace and harmony to the masses. In the meantime, the skeptics will continue to mindlessly debate in the face of all reason that the whole thing was a fluke, an act of random mathematical chance, leading coincidentally to the one thing the establishment rulers crave: total global totalitarian micromanagement.

You can contact Brandon Smith at: Alt-Market, where this article first appeared, is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better. 

10 13 11 flagbar


The Trans-Pacific Partnership Stop the TPP and Other Rigged “Trade Agreements”


 Solidarity Will Build the Power Needed to Transform Trade so People and Planet Come Before Profits


The moment facing the Trans-Pacific Partnership and its sibling the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (known as ‘TAFTA’) and the future approach to trade is reaching a critical stage. The TPP and TAFTA are attempts to get past the failed World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations, but like the WTO, these new agreements are meeting significant opposition and obstacles. We are poised to stop these attempts to rig the international economy in favor of multinational corporations and move to a new model of trade that respects the rights of people and nature, but it will take a coordinated effort. We must be prepared for moves to thwart that effort and organize to avoid them.

The TPP and TAFTA represent a new era of deception and back-room dealing to pass laws that have nothing to do with trade, but that hand even greater power to multinational corporations to profit from everything no matter the consequences for the health of people and the planet. For the first time, the text of the agreements has been classified and they are being negotiated in secret with hundreds of corporate advisers and minimal involvement by Congress. In order to complete the agreements without transparency and public input, the President has asked Congress to grant him the authority to sign them, ‘Fast Track,’ a form of Trade Promotion Authority.

As elections get closer, Democratic Party leaders in Congress are getting the message out to inside-the-beltway activists groups that they are unifying to support giving President Obama some form of Fast Track. Recent letters from member of Congress to the President indicate support for trade with particular stipulations, but the overall message is to continue negotiating. Washington advocacy groups believe that they must also show support for Fast Track or they will find themselves without access or influence.

Rather than kowtowing to the usual ‘on the table’ threat from the corrupt bi-partisan Congress, the movement needs to tell them that the only thing on the table is a complete transformation from the failed global trade that rigs profits for big business at the expense of the ecology of the planet and the necessities of the people. It is time to declare the TPP, TAFTA and the Services agreements as dead, develop a new approach to trade and begin to renegotiate past trade agreements like NAFTA that are doing ongoing damage to the economy, planet and people.

Congress be warned: The people are watching and are onto the rigged trade corruption scheme. Members of Congress will pay a political price, with the end of their careers, if they continue to force their failed trade strategy on the nation and the world.

Challenges for the TPP

For more than three years the President’s US Trade Representatives have sought Fast Track trade authority. Fast Track means that Congress would give up its constitutional responsibility “to regulate commerce between nations.” The movement for fair trade has fought back and pushed Congress to not give President Obama the authority he needs.

More than 3,150,000 have signed a petition to stop Fast Track.  At the critical moment in January and February when the President and “free” traders in Congress (note: whenever you see “free trade” think “rigged trade”) were set to push Fast Track legislation, the people responded with over 40,000 phone calls and 600,000 emails to Congress. There were also protests across the continent.  As a result, that Fast Track bill died.

The opposition is global. At the same time people were acting in the US, 65,000 people protested the TPP in Mexico and more than 1.8 million in Australia called for the text to be made public. President Obama was greeted with TPP protests when he visited Asia as was Vice President Biden when he visited Japan. We just returned from an economic conference organized by the Center for Global Justice that included people from the US, Mexico, Australia, China, Israel, Guatemala and other nations, and the top area where people agreed to work together was to stop the TPP and transform global trade.

This occurred because the TPP has been a matchstick that has united people into a ‘movement of movements’ of more than 150 organizations (including our project Popular Resistance) that worked together to Stop Fast Track. Activists concerned about food safety, worker rights, health care, finance, the environment, Internet freedom and more have organized scores of rallies and protests throughout the nation and around the world. There have been protests at trade negotiations even when they try to hide the location. The negotiators have become so fearful of protests that for the last negotiating session they fled 2,650 miles across Canada in an attempt to avoid them. The retreat failed as protesters exposed the TPP and brought 19,000 voices to the negotiations.

In this audacious protest last September, which we helped to organize, activists climbed up on and covered the US Trade Representative national office near the White House with four large banners to expose the secrecy.

In response to mobilization against the TPP, Congress in an election year has sent a variety of letters to the president on the shortcomings of the TPP. These include: 153 members of Congress calling for stronger labor standards, a bi-partisan letter signed by 140 members of Congress opposing the agricultural provisions of the TPP, and 120 members of Congress signed a letter saying they would not support a trade agreement with weak environmental standards and 35 members of Congress writing concerning the human rights violations in Vietnam, and Brunei adopting Sharia law. While these sound good, voters should be on alert to these election year actions. Language could be added to the TPP which sounds good but changes nothing as has occurred in previous trade deals. There is no form of the TPP that can actually protect the people and planet. Corporate lawyers have been writing the TPP for four years. The only response is to defeat the TPP.

Message to US Trade Representative, Obama and free-traders in Congress: If you have to be secretive, and fear protesters because your agreement is so unpopular, you need to start over. The process should be open, transparent and participatory. Simple message: Stop the Secrecy! This is supposed to be a democracy.

Desperate Attempts to Salvage the TPP

It has been evident that there is synergy between the movement’s success in stopping ‘Fast Track’ and the weakening negotiating position of the Obama administration. As protests have escalated, negotiators have become emboldened to stand up to the bullying of the United States.

Advocates of the TPP are beginning to face reality: the TPP negotiations may never reach completion. Last December, Wikileaks published documents that revealed there were wide chasms of dispute between the nations negotiating the TPP. Countries were unwilling to give transnational corporations as much power as the United States was demanding.

Now some advocates of the TPP believe that the TPP may be over.  Negotiators have missed three deadlines to conclude the talks. Countries are recognizing that the TPP is skewed in favor of one country, the United States, and its transnational corporations. They also see the reality that the WTO has been stalled since the Seattle protests in 1999 and has been unable to reach any agreement in the Doha Round.

Advocates of corporate trade agreements realize the people are connecting globalized trade to the wealth divide, lowering of labor standards and destruction of the environment. And, there is near universal opposition to investor state rights to sue in rigged trade tribunals for loss of expected profits. Transnational corporate globalization is hitting a wall of opposition.

More opposition to rigged trade is developing: LGBT groups have demanded the US stop negotiating with Brunei because of its brutal treatment of a penal code that targets women, LGBT and religious minorities; others are protesting how the TPP will worsen inequality and the wealth divide, result in lost jobs, lower wages andexpand the income divide, give corporations unusual new power under the guise of intellectual property, willmake NSA spying easier, force policing of Internet users, and result in more fracking in both the United States and Europe, as well as off-shore drilling and other extreme energy extraction.

 The Movement Should Not Compromise

We know that the transnationals and their corrupt congressional representatives want the TPP, TAFTA and Services Agreement to become law. It will result in concentration of wealth and political power in their hands and result in laws that could not be openly passed through legislatures to become law. We know they are not ready to give up on the trillions in profits they will reap from rigged trade.

We also know that the movement of movements that opposes rigged trade has shown some power and is capable of mobilizing even more people. As the push for rigged trade and a new form of Fast Track moves forward, if we are not fooled by false promises in Fast Track legislation, the movement to end corporate trade will grow even stronger.

Message to our allies: This is the time for continued solidarity, it is not the time for the movement to compromise, nor is the time for countries to give in to US demands. It is time for opposition to rigged corporate trade to take an even stronger stand: oppose the trade agreements that are currently being negotiated, refuse to enact any form of Fast Track and demand a transformation of trade to rules that provide for the necessities of the people and planet as the top priorities.

Labor has hopefully learned the lesson that merely improving the language in trade agreements that claims to protect workers will not protect labor, will not prevent the loss of jobs and will encourage the downward decline in wages. Environmentalists must have learned that trade agreements will encourage extreme energy extraction, ecology-destroying mining and destruction of the oceans and other waterways. The USTR knows the political importance of environmental protection and has been caught lying about the issue.  People concerned with the power of big corporations must now know that rigged trade makes corporations more powerful than governments and will undermine democracy, food security and safety, clean water and air as well as health care among other basic necessities.

Senator Ron Wyden, the chairman of the Finance Committee, has signaled that he will be pushing for what he calls “Smart Track,” an embarrassingly obvious false marketing term designed to fool people. This is a trade authority that if enacted is very likely to allow the TPP, TAFTA and Services Agreement to become law. Wyden has been told by his constituents as well as tech companies, who are a key part of his base, that they oppose any form of Fast Track.  People are not falling for this re-labeling and Wyden-marketing.

We need a new form of Trade Promotion Authority, but we cannot negotiate a new trade regimen until the current agreements: TPP, TAFTA and the Services Agreement are defeated.  If the so-called “Smart Track” becomes law, what happens to these three agreements that have been negotiated for years? A new approach to trade cannot retroactively apply to agreements that are so far along in negotiation.

 New Trade Era

What would appropriate trade look like? The goals of trade must be clearly stated. The first priorities for trade are meeting the necessities of people and benefitting their lives. This means trade must reduce wealth and income divides, raise wages and the standards of working conditions and ensure people have access to clean water, safe foods and high-quality healthcare. Second, trade must benefit the planet. The world needs to move toward clean, sustainable energy sources and stop the extreme energy extraction of carbon polluting energy as well as uranium for nuclear energy. Trade needs to be designed to move the planet to a carbon-free, nuclear-free energy economy. Ecology protecting trade means there should be less trade so that local communities can be self-sufficient, with small family farms thriving instead of being overcome by highly subsidized crops that allow large agribusiness to destroy traditional agriculture.  Relying on transporting foods thousands of miles when they can be grown locally is bad for local economies as well as for the environment and climate change.

And, the process of negotiating trade must be very different. While each country has different legislative and executive processes, the basics must be transparency in the negotiations and participation by the public and elected representatives throughout the process. In the United States this could mean that as trade is negotiated chapters are shared with responsible committees and the public so we can weigh in on whether the chapter is supported. It also means that when the full agreement is reached, it is published with sufficient time for the public and legislators to read and review it. Further, the Congress should be able to hold hearings and make final amendment suggestions that the USTR will then bring back to other countries before the agreement is signed by the president.

These are transformational changes in the goals, purposes and process of trade agreements. To achieve these changes the movement of movements must show solidarity and defeat the TPP, TAFTA and Services Agreement. This show of political power is the only approach to bringing Congress and the president to our perspective.

The next steps for the movement are to organize locally to broaden the movement. We urge people around the world to put in place “Trade Justice Zones” where local governments pass laws and resolutions that make it clear – we will not obey trade agreements that are negotiated in secret without a democratic process.  Local communities need to keep control of their sovereignty so they can protect the environment and people in their communities. See e.g. actions taken by Madison and Los Angeles.

The next big push by the Obama administration and Congress will come around the G-20 summit being held in Sydney, Australia on November 15 and 16, during the lame duck session of Congress. This is an opportunity for the world’s citizens to tell the leaders of the world – we oppose rigged corporate trade agreements and want a new approach to trade that puts people and planet before profits.

No doubt, some in Congress will take action to strengthen President Obama’s negotiating position before the G20, perhaps by promising Fast Track will pass during the lame duck or making it look like Congress is moving in that direction. Civil society must take united action across the Pacific and Atlantic just before the summit to show our opposition to rigged corporate trade; and during the summit with a worldwide day of action opposing globalized trade for transnational corporations. People of the world must unite against corporatization and in favor of real democracy.

In the United States, opposition to rigged corporate trade has made these trade agreements increasingly toxic. That toxicity needs to continue to build so that no elected representative thinks they can get away with supporting TPP, TAFTA or the Services Agreement, no matter how good they try to make it sound.

The movement has shown it is capable of educating each other despite a corporate media blackout of these corporate trade agreements. By sharing articles like this one widely we can educate and mobilize a growing mass movement for a new form of trade. To stay informed, take the pledge at our campaign,

Now is the time to recommit to not compromising with the corporate-dominated governments that ignore our interests. If we do so, we can stop Fast Track, defeat corporate trade, transform it to a people and planet form of trade and begin to build the new economy essential to humankind and the planet.

This article is produced by Popular Resistance in conjunction with AlterNet.  It is a weekly review of the activities of the resistance movement.

10 13 11 flagbar

The Tyranny of the Nanny State: Where the Government Knows What’s Best for You



 By John W. Whitehead

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”—C.S. Lewis

Surveillance cameras, government agents listening in on your phone calls, reading your emails and text messages and monitoring your spending, mandatory health care, sugary soda bans, anti-bullying laws, zero tolerance policies, political correctness: these are all outward signs of a government—i.e., a societal elite—that believes it knows what is best for you and can do a better job of managing your life than you can.

This is tyranny disguised as “the better good.” Indeed, as I document in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, this is the tyranny of the Nanny State: marketed as benevolence, enforced with armed police, and inflicted on all those who do not belong to the elite ruling class that gets to call the shots. Thus, this explains the recent rash of parents getting charged with negligence and arrested for leaving their kids alone for any amount of time, whether at a park, in a store, in a car, or in their front yard—another sign of what C.S. Lewis referred to as tyranny exercised by “omnipotent moral busybodies.”

For example, working mom Debra Harrell was arrested, spent 17 days in jail, lost custody of her daughter, and if convicted, could spend up to 10 years in jail all because she let her 9-year-old daughter play alone at a nearby park. Single mother Shanesha Taylor, unemployed and essentially homeless, was arrested for leaving her kids in her car during a 40-minute job interview.

For the so-called “crime” of allowing her 7-year-old son to visit a neighborhood playground located a half mile from their house, Nicole Gainey was interrogated, arrested and handcuffed in front of her son, and transported to the local jail where she was physically searched, fingerprinted, photographed and held for seven hours and then forced to pay almost $4,000 in bond in order to return to her family. Gainey now faces a third-degree criminal felony charge that carries with it a fine of up to $5,000 and 5 years in jail.

A Connecticut mother was arrested after her 7-year-old, who wasn’t wearing a helmet, fell off his scooter and allegedly injured himself. Patricia Juarez was arrested after letting her 7-year-old son play at a Legoland store in the mall while she did her shopping. Tammy Cooper was arrested, jailed overnight and charged with child endangerment for letting her kids ride their scooters alone in the cul-de-sac outside her suburban home.

Jeffrey Williamson was arrested after his 8-year-old son skipped church to play with neighborhood children. The experience has left scars on the household. “Every time that we leave in our car or drive down the street or something like that, every time they see a cop in Blanchester, they freak out and say, ‘Daddy, Daddy, Daddy, are they going to arrest you?’” Williamson said.

Crystal Byers was arrested after refusing to allow a social worker to take her children away, despite the fact that the state services worker was unable to provide any paperwork supporting the removal. Then there was the father arrested, charged with child cruelty, and banished from his family home after he spanked his 3-year-old daughter once for talking back to her mother, pushing the screen out of her window, refusing to pick up her toys and throwing a belt at him. The father was also ordered to undergo 52 weeks of parenting classes and two monitored visits with his daughter each week.

These manifestations of the criminalization of parenthood are worsened by what journalist Josh Harkinson more broadly refers to as the “criminalization of the working poor,” oftentimes targeting parents “struggling to make ends meet with no better child care options.” As Harkinson points out: “Is the seven-year-old son of the janitor in Jacksonville better off now that his dad is in jail? How about the baby left in a car at 8 a.m., shielded from the sun, with the windows cracked and sunroof open, while her mom took a final exam for cosmetology school? Or the mother who left her two kids in the car while she donated blood plasma to get gas money?”

Indeed, in the rush to cast judgment on these “negligent” parents, arresting them, jailing them, and sentencing them to outrageous prison terms, there is little concern shown for the hapless kids who in one way or another contribute to their parents’ arrests and are then left to grapple with feelings of guilt, abandonment, etc., not to mention the trauma of foster care. It’s estimated that 2.7 million children in the U.S. have at least one parent in prison, whether it be a local jail or a state or federal penitentiary, due to a wide range of factors ranging from overcriminalization and surprise raids at family homes to roadside traffic stops.

Despite the arrest-driven uproar over what constitutes negligent parenting and the government’s attitude that it—in concert with Social Services—knows what is best for your kids, it turns out that kids aren’t really in any greater danger today than they were 40 years ago, at least not from abductions by strangers. “What has changed over the last 40 years,” note journalists Jessica Grose and Hanna Rosin for Slate, “is our sense of community. Mothers work, neighbors talk less, and the divorce rate began to creep upward in the 1970s and has remained at around 45 percent…. Over the years, parental fears have also translated into the view that children are fragile, too tender to handle tricky emotional or physically risky activities.”

Having allowed our fears to be codified and our actions criminalized, we now find ourselves in a strange new world where just about everything we do is criminalized, not just our parenting decisions. Even so, how did we go from enacting laws to make our worlds safer to being saddled with a government that polices our social decisions?

As with most of the problems plaguing us in the American police state, we are the source of our greatest problems. As journalist Gracy Olmstead recognizes, the problem arose when we looked “first to the State to care for the situation, rather than exercising any sort of personal involvement… These actions reveal a more passive, isolated attitude. But here, again, we see the result of breakdown in modern American community—without a sense of communal closeness or responsibility, we act as bystanders rather than as stewards.”

Olmstead continues:

[Communitarian libertarian Robert] Nisbet predicted that, in a society without strong private associations, the State would take their place — assuming the role of the church, the schoolroom, and the family, asserting a “primacy of claim” upon our children. “It is hard to overlook the fact,” he wrote, “that the State and politics have become suffused by qualities formerly inherent only in the family or the church.” In this world, the term “nanny state” takes on a very literal meaning.

Unfortunately, even in the face of outright corruption and incompetency on the part of our elected officials, Americans in general remain relatively gullible, eager to be persuaded that the government can solve the problems that plague us—whether it be terrorism, an economic depression, an environmental disaster, how or what we eat or even keeping our children safe.

We have relinquished control over the most intimate aspects of our lives to government officials who, while they may occupy seats of authority, are neither wiser, smarter, more in tune with our needs, more knowledgeable about our problems, nor more aware of what is really in our best interests. Yet having bought into the false notion that the government does indeed know what’s best for us and can ensure not only our safety but our happiness and will take care of us from cradle to grave—that is, from daycare centers to nursing homes—we have in actuality allowed ourselves to be bridled and turned into slaves at the bidding of a government that cares little for our freedoms or our happiness.

The lesson is this: once a free people allows the government inroads into their freedoms or uses those same freedoms as bargaining chips for security, it quickly becomes a slippery slope to outright tyranny. Nor does it seem to matter whether it’s a Democrat or a Republican at the helm anymore, because the bureaucratic mindset on both sides of the aisle now seems to embody the same philosophy of authoritarian government, whose priorities are to remain in control and in power.

Modern government in general—ranging from the militarized police in SWAT team gear crashing through our doors to the rash of innocent citizens being gunned down by police to the invasive spying on everything we do—is acting illogically, even psychopathically. (The characteristics of a psychopath include a “lack of remorse and empathy, a sense of grandiosity, superficial charm, conning and manipulative behavior, and refusal to take responsibility for one’s actions, among others.” )

When our own government no longer sees us as human beings with dignity and worth but as things to be manipulated, maneuvered, mined for data, manhandled by police, conned into believing it has our best interests at heart, mistreated, and then jails us if we dare step out of line, punishes us unjustly without remorse, and refuses to own up to its failings, we are no longer operating under a constitutional republic. Instead, what we are experiencing is a pathocracy: tyranny at the hands of a psychopathic government, which “operates against the interests of its own people except for favoring certain groups.”

So where does that leave us?

Having allowed the government to expand and exceed our reach, we find ourselves on the losing end of a tug-of-war over control of our country and our lives. And for as long as we let them, government officials will continue to trample on our rights, always justifying their actions as being for the good of the people.

Yet the government can only go as far as “we the people” allow. Therein lies the problem.

The problem is that we have suspended our moral consciences in favor of the police state. As Chris Hedges rightly told me years ago, “Not having to make moral choice frees you from a great deal of anxiety. It frees you from responsibility. And it assures that you will always be wrapped in the embrace of the powerful as long as, of course, you will do or dance to the tune the powers play… when you do what is right, you often have to understand that you are not going to be lauded and praised for it. Making a moral decision always entails risks, certainly to one’s career and to one’s standing in the community.”

The choice before us is clear, and it is a moral choice. It is the choice between tyranny and freedom, dictatorship and autonomy, peaceful slavery and dangerous freedom, and manufactured pipedreams of what America used to be versus the gritty reality of what she is today.

Most of all, perhaps, the choice before us is that of being a child or a parent, of obeying blindly, never questioning, and marching in lockstep with the police state or growing up, challenging injustice, standing up to tyranny, and owning up to our responsibilities as citizens, no matter how painful, risky or uncomfortable.

As author Erich Fromm warned in his book Civil Disobedience, “At this point in history, the capacity to doubt, to criticize and to disobey may be all that stands between a future for mankind and the end of civilization.”


Just imagine one million Americans reaching the conclusion that their government is guilty of treason against them, and they decide to organize a civilian army and eliminate the problem. How many one million man armies have been defeated in the past thousand years? So getting rid of the scumbags is not the big problem, but finding honest, capable leaders to replace them is a bitch!  

10 13 11 flagbar



8-11-2014 6-48-54 AM



Dreams of the far future destiny of man were dragging up from its shallow and unquiet grave the old dream of man as god…” – C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength, 1945

In 1945, George Orwell, famous for his stunningly accurate portrayal of a future police state in 1984, commented on prominent author C. S. Lewis’ book ThatHideous StrengthHideous Strength revolves around the National Institute for Coordinated Experiments (NICE) and the organization’s plot to seize control of all life. Orwell’s commentary was published in the Manchester Evening News in 1945 with the headline “THE SCIENTISTS TAKE OVER.” Orwell wrote,

“All superfluous life is to be wiped out, all natural forces tamed, the common people are to be used as slaves and vivisection subjects by the ruling caste of scientists, who even see their way to conferring immortal life upon themselves. Man, in short, is to storm the heavens and overthrow the gods, or even to become a god himself.

There is nothing outrageously improbable in such a conspiracy.Indeed, at a moment when a single atomic bomb – of a type already pronounced “obsolete” – has just blown probably three hundred thousand people to fragments, it sounds all too topical. Plenty of people in our age do entertain the monstrous dreams of power that Mr. Lewis attributes to his characters, and we are within sight of the time when such dreams will be realisable.”

Do we live in an age when these dreams of power could become a reality? Lewis and Orwell have been proven very accurate in their portrayals of the future 70 years ago. Much of the momentum for the scientific developments that would create these formerly fantastical technologies began in the lifetimes of both Lewis and Orwell. They witnessed the rise of the science of molecular biology, initiated by the Rockefeller Foundation and other tax-exempt foundations who were interested in finding out how the human body operates, with an eye toward better controlling society. The eugenics and social control paradigms that sprung from this foundation sparked scientific revolution in the early 20th century are still in play today among the intelligentsia of western society.

Vannevar Bush became the first Science Advisor to the United States government during World War II under President Franklin Roosevelt. Bush played a vital role in the creation of what we know today as the Military Industrial Complex. Specifically, the method of scientific research of this gargantuan organization – beginning with the Office of Scientific Research and Development – was devised by Vannevar.

The roots of the internet can be traced to Bush’s ideas in 1945. The forerunner to the computer itself can also be attributed to his early designs. From 1935 to 1946 the Rockefeller Foundation funded Vannevar Bush’s development of the mechanical differential analyzer at MIT for a total of $230,500. This device, along with the Hollerith machine, is considered to be one of the forerunners of the desktop computer that we all know and use today.

Scientific developments and new technologies are often spun as beneficial things for humanity, and in fact many of them are. We need to remember that while each development brings power to mankind, it also gives power to some men over other men. As Orwell said, “There is nothing improbable” about such desires for power.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned in his 1961 farewell speech “…in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.”

In 1968 LIFE magazine profiled a man named Herman Kahn. Labeled an “action intellectual”, Kahn is a founding father of future studies. LIFE reports, “Herman Kahn has been a major figure in one of the most fascinating shifts of power in U.S. History: from identifiable public leaders to the ‘action intellectuals.’” The article continues, “As counselors to the decision-makers, men such as Kahn often have access to future technology (what is known, but not yet disclosed) and official intelligence (what is known, but not yet revealed, about the capacities and plans of other nations)… Thus, decisions – based on private knowledge, analyzed by private consultants and debated in private – can become public policy. This is a process of invisible power.”

Scientists from all over the world are warning that robots and artificial intelligence could eliminate humanity. Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX, a private space exploration company, told CNBC recently that he is worried about a “Terminator-like scenario” as a result of advancing AI technology.

Top A.I. researcher Hugo de Garis provides another example. De Garis explains that the development of super-intelligent A.I. may lead to a devastating “Artilect” war that could kill billions of people. This war could break out when two distinct groups of humanity emerge; One group embraces the god-like artificial intelligence and technological advancement with religious fervor, the other group fights to prevent it from ever being built. He adds that he is more than willing to take the risk, saying, “As a brain builder myself, am I prepared to risk the extinction of the human species for the sake of building an artilect? … yep.”

This mindset, common among scientific elites, was articulated by Arthur Kroker, Professor of Political Science at the University of Victoria and Director of the Pacific Centre for Technology and Culture. Kroker identified these individuals as “Suicidal nihilists” who “…can very happily ally themselves with a notion of nuclear holocaust or perfect exterminism… They’re creating again and again the exterminism of human memory, the exterminism of human sensibility, the exterminism of individuated human intelligence…”


Partly due to popular culture, transhumanism has begun to catch on with the younger generations. As Amanda Stoel, co-founder of the Facebook group “Singularity Network” told the Huffington Post, “Three years ago, we had only around 400 members, but today we have over 10,000 members.”

Another article from the Huffington Post says that the transhumanist movement is “on the verge of going mainstream” due to increasing popular culture references to transhumanist ideas. Art has been used for millennia to initiate and give support to ideas and movements. Transhumanist artwork in the form of sculptures, paintings, and music is now steadily flowing into our society. Movies like Transcendence, and Avatar are two recent examples.

A haunting sculpture of a humanoid robotic figure crawling through water is featured at the luxury Grove Hotel in Watford, UK.

The hotel was the site of the secretive 2013 Bilderberg meeting. The Grove hotel hosted Google’s annual Zeitgeist conference just a few short days prior to Bilderberg’s gathering. Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt, who currently employs top transhumanist Ray Kurzweil as director of engineering, must have felt a kindred spirit at the Grove and its metallic humanoid sculptures.

Transhumanists embrace the idea of radical human evolution aided by technology. Some see an entirely new species emerging when revolutionary technologies begin to be applied to the human race. Technologies for the improvement of human performance are at the center of transhumanist thought. Most of these technologies begin with military applications, and only after a period of use by the military or black operations are they unveiled to the general public. In 2008 the JASON group, the Pentagon’s top scientific advisers, warned that the U.S. military could faceenemies with technologically enhanced abilities. These capabilities include brain-machine interfaces and pharmaceutical drugs that enhance cognitive abilities.

This new arms race will eventually force our society into a transhuman future due to the never ending desire to dominate our enemies. The debate over whether or not we should genetically modify or chip our soldiers will inevitably spill over into the general public, who will be using these technologies themselves. According to CNN, human trials in the civilian world for memory enhancing brain chips are set to begin in less than a year. Exoskeletons, which provide super-human strength to those who wear them, were originally developed by DARPA, the Department of Defense’s research agency.

Other examples of technology with possible transhumanist applications include nanotechnology, synthetic biology, genetic modification, and cognitive science. Initial uses of these technologies will be to help the disabled walk, hear, and see. After this, enhancement of normal individuals is an inevitability.

Marc Andreessen is a Silicon Valley tycoon who has founded several multi-billion dollar tech companies including Mosaic (the first widely used web browser) and Netscape. He recently drew criticism from Salon magazine for a “tweet storm” on twitter that praised the god-like power of advancing technology. Salon ran the headline “The tech industry’s God complex is getting out of control.”

Andreessen tweeted “I am firmly convinced many people are fundamentally underestimating the power and potential of these new superpowers in the years ahead.” He continued, “Combine modern bio, 3D printing, & computing–>prosthetics & exoskeletons; superpower: paralyzed to walk, disabled to abled, blind to see.”

Some scientists are predicting that getting chip implants will become mandatory due to overwhelming societal pressure. Cybernetics scientist Dr Mark Gasson told the Sydney Morning Herald that, “It’s not possible to interact in society today in any meaningful way, without having a mobile phone. I think human implants will go along a similar route. It will be such a disadvantage not to have the implant that it will essentially not be optional.”

A New Dark Age or Renaissance?

Transhumanists, like political parties and religions, are broken into sects. There are distinct groups within the transhumanist movement that differ on how radical technologies should be employed, but both embrace the core ideals of transhumanism.

There are so called “libertarian” transhumanists who believe that revolutionary technologies should be used for the good of mankind. Billionaire businessmen Peter Thiel and Elon Musk are among the ranks of this group. They are engaging in R&D on synthetic biology, space exploration, artificial islands (with the goal of escaping government interference), and actively support the Singularity Institute.

The industrial revolution and all of its technological advancements spawned dozens of communities that sought to live out utopian ideas in response to new issues caused by the revolution. The industrial revolution will pale in comparison to the coming era of transhumanism and the Singularity. This time the very makeup of human beings is about to change, and has begun to change already. Brain chips and genetically modified species are a far cry from steam powered trains and assembly lines.

Interests that represent the power structure – which historically seeks to perpetuate itself and dominate everything else – are actively investing in and researching these technologies as well; but with a different goal in mind. Money and power will have a significant influence in how the era of Singularity develops.

Gaping societal divides will inevitably ensue over the development of these technologies. Fred Charles Ikle, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy under President Reagan, outlines this divide in his 2006 book Annihilation from Within. Ikle writes, “The prospect is that in the decades ahead, biotechnology – together with other sciences – may fundamentally change the human species and thus pose an elemental threat to democracy, the world order, and indeed to all civilizations.”

The broader geopolitical, technological and economic shape of the future is being molded by current trends and power plays by the establishment. We are facing a situation where governments are going broke, globalist influences have broken down national borders, and non-governmental organizations, tax exempt foundations and mega corporations are filling the gap. In the coming era, mega coporations will provide advanced technology to their constituents and thus gain loyalty in their own unique sectors of society. As we stray away from broken governments to provide security and prosperity, these entities will take the reigns. According to futurists Parag and Ayesha Khanna,

“Employees of Facebook or Google can spend their days on campuses that are effectively full-service communes; the same is happening in companies in Russia, India, and China. One day a corporate passport might afford them greater freedom of mobility than their national citizenship.”

Analysts writing in the 2008 U.S. Army War College paper “Leadership in the Era of the Human Singularity” portray a future in which multiple scenarios are possible. One sees a new renaissance and unprecedented human development aided by technology, the other envisions a new dark age of world-wide high tech totalitarian control.

In the paper, Dr. Barton Kunstler documents the impact of ESI’s (Enhanced Singular Individuals). These people are “augmented” with performance enhancing technologies like brain chips. Kunstler states,

“This is the crux of power and also a focus of much futurist thought. Technocracy has long been depicted as uniform and oppressive, with social control the primary aim. In broadest terms, ESIs will influence social organization to reflect and favor the expression of their outsized talents. This shift could imply a commitment to creativity and innovation, with society organized to favor artists, visionaries, scientists, and inventors… Or it could result in 1984-like scenarios due to the power endowed by invasive, body -and psyche- penetrating technologies.”

We are in a war of ideas right now. If there were ever a time for activism and involvement in the direction of society, it is now. How will we deal with technologies that will intrude into our bodies and minds? Will a tyrannical global elite – as envisioned by papers published by the United Kingdom’s Ministry Defense, Army War College and others – dominate the globe in a technocratic scientific dictatorship? Ultimately it is up to individuals and the choices we make.

The ideasphere of the future is being shaped now. Elites around the world are keenly aware of the importance of the historical time we are living in, and the media promotion of transhumanism is beginning to prepare us. Awareness of these issues is a critical step. Only then do you have choice.

Should our progress be measured by the power of our technology, or something else? A highly technological society is not necessarily free. A more prudent test of progress is the amount of liberty that we enjoy. No matter how much science and technology attempt to tame nature, alter our bodies and forever change the human race in an attempt to cheat death, risk and uncertainty will always be present. In striving for these things we may end up destroying the human spirit, and a power hungry elite is more than willing to help us along.

10 13 11 flagbar



 How would you like to get rid of all of that unconstitutional debt the Federal Reserve System has created in the name of the American people?

By Marilyn M. Barnewall

Just as the concept of State Banks is a partial solution to the ever-increasing debt load borne by the American people (and the rest of the world carries a similar and equally illegitimate burden), the concept of odious (or immoral) debt is a partial solution.

(Note:  See previous News With Views articles about State Banks herehere, and here.  The most recent – and longest, most thorough – article can be found here at Veterans Today.)

Just a thought… if we keep finding partial solutions to the complex political and economic problems so much a part of America today, we will eventually end up with a full set of teeth.  “They” have created these problems in a way that requires “partial” solutions to them.  Everyone looks for a simple solution – “Impeachment will solve the problem!”  No.  It will not.  The problems – including our misbegotten Congress – were there before Obama and they will be there after he leaves.

This isn’t a terribly complex concept but it does require some reading to understand its value.  Most important things require a little effort.  You need to know the history behind odious – or immoral – debt.  I began writing about it more than two years ago and have been investigating it ever since.

On December 6, 2008, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa exposed a great weakness in the world financial system.  Correa didn’t make a scheduled interest payment on private bonds.  Ecuador had defaulted in 1998 when going through a financial crisis.  South and Central American Governments sometimes do not take debt – or illegal immigration of their people to the U.S. – very seriously (Argentina is currently at it again).  This time, however, was different.  Correa told the world that his small nation was not going to pay “obviously immoral and illegitimate debts.”

Ecuador’s gross domestic product (GDP) is close to 50 billion Euros and its “immoral debt” is about 11 billion Euros.  It’s a small country.  But that isn’t the point.  The “immoral debt” point made by Rafael Correa, was announced on television on December 12, 2008.

Ecuador’s President said immoral and illegitimate debts violate the Constitution of his country and oppressed his people.  He refused to pay.  If that is the standard by which we define “immoral debt,” this information is of critical importance.  It may present to the American people a strategy for getting rid of a lot of debt… immoral debt.

You may say “What does an action taken by a small nation in Central America have to do with a nation like America that has a GDP of $17 trillion and debt of $18 trillion?”  You may scoff.  “The United States would never do such a thing!”

If that is your response, you may want to sit down before reading further because the United States Government has used the odious debt escape clause twice… once quite recently when President George W. Bush refused to pay the debts of Saddam Hussein when our military removed him from power.

The question becomes:  What debts are “odious” or “immoral,” and which are not?  What is an illegitimate debt? 

President Correa related the Ecuadorian “immoral debt” to violations of that nation’s Constitution.  Since the Rule of Law flows from the Constitution, that sounds lawful and correct.

In America, can we look at mortgage-backed derivatives and millions of unlawful foreclosures and come to the same conclusion?  How about the debts and the government funds loaned to the banksters that created them and who got bailed out by additional funds from the pockets of American citizens via the Federal Reserve? A good case can be made that they are “immoral” or “odious” debt.

What else might represent “immoral debt?”

Well, if it’s anything that is unconstitutional, can a claim be made that the entire Federal Reserve System is “unconstitutional?”

Article One, Section 8 of the United States Constitution says “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;” Section 8 also says Congress has the responsibility “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;” that sounds pretty clear… no law degree required.

There is a lawful way to change the Constitution of the United States.  It involves both the House of Representatives and the Senate.  Each must approve by a two-thirds super-majority vote a joint resolution amending the Constitution.  The joint resolution does not require the signature of the President but is sent directly to the States for ratification.  Once ratified by the American people, the Constitution is lawfully amended.  That is the process put in place by our Founding Fathers.

As anyone who is familiar with the history of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 knows, this procedure was not followed.  Instead, politicians who wanted a central bank (which America had for 20 years on two occasions until 1913) told their opponents to go home for Christmas on December 23rd and proceeded to pass this act unconstitutionally.  Not only was there no super-majority, there probably wasn’t even a majority around for that vote.  The Congress cannot, under its own limited powers, change the Constitution of the United States.  The Federal Reserve Act and the banking system that evolved from it have never been constitutional. 

Should foreign nations, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, etc.,  beware?  Are they are doing business with an unlawful agency… one that could be found in violation of the Constitution and not qualified to create debt in the name of the people of the United States of America?  If so, doesn’t that make it “immoral” or “odious” debt?

What other debt might be unconstitutional?  Isn’t it true that only Congress has the constitutional (moral) authority to declare war?  Could that mean that any debt from non-declared wars represents “immoral debt?”  It appears one could certainly make that argument!

As applied to nations and states, immoral debt occurs when the purpose of debt does not serve the best interests of the nation or the state for which debt was incurred.  Such debts, says international law, are the personal debts of “the regime that incurred them and not the debts of the state.”  In other words, the newly-formed state that replaces the old nation state is not responsible for the criminal behavior of the old nation state.

Think of the old Soviet Union’s monetary failure and the new Russian Federation.  The new Federation was not forced to carry the debts of the old Soviet Union on its newly opened bank accounts.  Actually, when viewed from that perspective, the failure of the USSR was a tremendous economic blessing to Russia and the other nations of the old Soviet bloc.

Fraud in the inducement is one way to interpret immoral debt.  Think of it as an invalid contract… invalid because a signor was either coerced (or was lied to) to gain his or her signature on a contract or an agreement.  Fraud in the inducement occurs when one person is given faulty information about the intentions of another party to the agreement or contract and signs on the dotted line based on that lie.  The more serious is the resultant injury to the defrauded person, the more serious are the potential consequences.

The concept of immoral debt comes from a Russian legal theorist and is based on Mexico’s refusal to pay the debts of Emperor Maximilian’s government.

On two occasions, the United States refused to repay debt incurred through the coercive behavior of other nations.

1)  The first precedent of claiming odious debt on behalf of the United States was when America seized control of Cuba from Spain. Spain insisted that Cuba repay Spanish loans made to Cuba and the U.S. refused to pay.  We said the debt served Spain’s, not Cuba’s, interest.  We said the debt was imposed on Cuba by force of arms… it was odious debt.

The precedent was upheld by international law in Great Britain v. Costa Rica (1923) when money was put to use for illegitimate purposes and the lenders knew it.  The debt was deemed “odious” and went unpaid.

 2)  President George W. Bush refused to pay much of the debt incurred by Saddam Hussein because it was “odious debt.”

There was a lot of disagreement about Bush’s debt denial – the Gulf countries claimed money was owed to them by the U.S. when we removed Hussein from power.  Iraq said the Gulf States made grants to assist the deposed Iraqis in the war with Iran.  “Grants” rather than “loans” were made because of threats from Iran.  European and Middle East Governments and banks that made loans to Iraq during its war did not want Iran’s wrath if Iraq lost the war… so they made “grants” which, they said, were really loans… though no loan documentation existed.  The U.S. Government refused to pay because this was “odious debt.”

The Russian legal theorist who created the concept of odious debt is Alexander Nahum Sack.  His 1927 treatise on the subject says:

“When a despotic regime contracts a debt, not for the needs or in the interests of the state, but rather to strengthen itself, to suppress a popular insurrection, etc, this debt is odious for the people of the entire state. This debt does not bind the nation; it is a debt of the regime, a personal debt contracted by the ruler, and consequently it falls with the demise of the regime. The reason why these odious debts cannot attach to the territory of the state is that they do not fulfill one of the conditions determining the lawfulness of State debts, namely that State debts must be incurred, and the proceeds used, for the needs and in the interests of the State. Odious debts, contracted and utilized for purposes which, to the lenders’ knowledge, are contrary to the needs and the interests of the nation, are not binding on the nation – when it succeeds in overthrowing the government that contracted them – unless the debt is within the limits of real advantages that these debts might have afforded. The lenders have committed a hostile act against the people; they cannot expect a nation which has freed itself of a despotic regime to assume these odious debts, which are the personal debts of the ruler.”

The next important question is:  Can it be proven that the American government has acted in a despotic manner?  Do illegal immigration and treaties like NAFTA and CAFTA serve or harm the needs of the nation?  Did they help destroy our manufacturing base?  Is the government refusing to seal our border?  Is there an Ebola outbreak that could easily be brought into this nation by those willing to blow up themselves or their children if it gains them access to Islamic heaven?  Would carrying the Ebola virus into America rather than a bomb around their chests be a blessing to them? 

Are our laws being selectively enforced?  Have journalists and world leaders had their communications targeted?  Have weapons been sold to Mexican drug cartels in violation of our laws?  Is it constitutional for the IRS to discriminate against Tea Party conservative groups?  Are facts about Benghazi being withheld from the Congress which has oversight responsibility?  When things like this happen, is Government acting with reckless disregard for the Constitution and the American people?

If so, debt incurred because of such behavior may represent immoral/odious debt.

Can the concept of odious debt be put to work in our efforts to retake our nation?  It is established, it has been used and upheld internationally and it has been used by the United States.

The precedent is there and when the current federal system follows the historic footsteps of the Soviet Union and fails, the newly-formed American government has a strong legal precedent when it refuses to pay the debt of its predecessor.

10 13 11 flagbar




By Professor Steven Yates

August 9, 2014

The Higher Education Matrix (II)

By the mid-1980s, higher education was entering a period of decline. The “golden age,” to the extent it existed, was long gone.

Consider first teaching. University teaching was more and more folded into a species of entertainment. Students came to college expecting to be entertained. The quality of government schools had also been dropping, courtesy of fads like Values Clarification and Outcomes-Based Education all of which followed “progressive education” in ratcheting down academics. There was a great deal being written about the so-called “affective domain” (i.e., emotion rather than cognition). Mastering the theories and classroom techniques of the social engineers behind such movements was a condition of getting the certification necessary for a job in a government school. In the Real Matrix, these were the “experts”; in the Desert of the Real, none of the originators of “theories of how children learn” had spent time in the classroom. They were lost in clouds of theory. None of their theories worked. Students thus entered college unprepared for what had traditionally been college-level work. Often they could not write coherent, grammatical sentences with all words spelled correctly. They could not work simply math problems. Most tragically, they had no grasp of personal finance—and so were fruit ripe for the picking for unscrupulous recruiters ready to lavish them with “student aid” packages.

University faculty—more and more of whom worked on semester-by-semester contracts as we’ll see momentarily—had become slaves of student evaluations courtesy of the Real Matrix everybody’s-equal mindset, and thus of the consumer’s mindset that came with Desert of the Real corporatization. Those newly minted Ph.D.s lucky enough to find academic jobs had a choice: they could keep their consumers entertained while trying to teach—or, again, find new careers.

Ludwig Wittgenstein is considered by some to be the twentieth century’s most influential philosopher. By any measure, he was one of the field’s deepest thinkers. By 1990, he would not have been employable in an American university. He only published two items during his life. In person he was eccentric and socially awkward. His lectures were not “student-centered”; they were often intense exercises articulating difficult ideas, some of them completely original. Sometimes he would pause in deep thought. These pauses could last minutes. This obviously exceeds the attention span of those raised on television. Wittgenstein would not have been seen as a “good colleague” or “effective in the classroom.”

In 2011, a work entitled Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses appeared. It showed, with a wealth of statistics, that undergraduates were learning essentially nothing during their first two years on the average campus.

Now consider scholarship. I keep returning to academic philosophy because I know it best. Philosophers produced impressive achievements during the period 1945-1979 in almost every area, during academia’s “golden age.” The 1980s and 1990s, however, began to reveal the fruits of the repressive-tolerance mindset: “scholarship” combining cultural Marxism with collective grievance. These fruits included such revelations as that of radical feminist Catharine MacKinnon who viewed voluntary (heterosexual) sexual intercourse as akin to rape or “black studies” theorist Leonard Jeffries who saw the world as divided into “ice people” and “sun people.” (Roger Kimball’s Tenured Radicals, 1990, lays out numerous examples of the pseudo-scholarship of the academic hard left.) If you saw this as nonsense, it was because you were “viscerally racist” or “sexist” or “homophobic” (a propaganda term implying that criticism of open homosexual activity or policies favoring homosexuals is based on irrational fear, a phobia, rather than principle; irrational fear is to be treated therapeutically, not answered rationally).

It is probable, however, that the “culture war” provoked by such nonsense hid the corporatization of higher education, as we saw above. Universities were undergoing a massive shift in the use of resources from hiring and supporting faculty to creating layers of administration, paying administrators salaries vastly exceeding those of faculty. There was, in other words, a massive “redistribution of wealth” upwards, as with the larger society. The percentage of faculty members with tenure dropped as the older generation retired and was replaced not with new tenure lines but contingent slots—filled by ”adjuncts” who were hired on a semester-by-semester basis and paid poverty wages with no benefits. By 1990, over a third of new faculty hires fit this category. By 2000, the number was around 50%. Today, it is closing in on 75%! The latter are told, in accordance with the cost-cutting philosophy of corporatism, “we don’t have the money.” Those saying such things are either ignorant or lying. The money to pay faculty members living wages exists in university systems. The latter can pay top administrators six figures and football coaches even more. Administrations can spend millions on new buildings, sports facilities, and campus beautification projects. There are cases, e.g., this one, of “adjuncts” being let go after years of service to a university, with no severance packages, and then dying of treatable conditions because they were living in dire poverty!

How much of this was planned? Possibly very little. It is true, grants were made to radical feminists, e.g., courtesy of big foundations like Ford, and for the creation of ridiculous “gender studies” type programs. These helped discredit the humanities in the eyes of rational observers. Overall, however, no “grand conspiracy” was necessary. The systems destroying independent thought in higher education were running on their own. Those with real power could laugh at the radical feminists and critical race theorists and queer theorists as they swung at straight white male windmills. What counted was that the faculty, overall, had been turned into a precariat: those who worked precariously, on the margins, who could be gotten rid of at the drop of a hat (or a bad set of student evaluations) and therefore constituted easily-controlled cheap labor—think of today’s universities as the academic equivalent of the sweatshops we saw two installments back, and you have the right idea.

It is worth realizing that power elites despise intellectuals. They do not trust them. While some will do the elites’ bidding, intellectuals tend to be independent-minded and do not bow automatically to authority. They want the freedom to think and write, and they want youto have that freedom. When dictators come to power, intellectuals are usually the first to be rounded up and imprisoned or shot. Corporatism has taken a different route: impoverish intellectuals as a class. Subject them to a chronic fear of starvation. This route has proven more effective than imprisonment or martyrdom! It has neutered two generations so far. Where, after all, are these generations’ Wittgensteins? The most significant philosophers today, in the U.S. anyway, are all in their 70s and 80s!

Corporatists want a low-wage, compliant work force, and also to be able to charge higher prices for an increasingly inferior product. When I attended college in the 1970s, the cost of attending a public university was a few hundred dollars per semester. Private ones were a couple of thousand dollars. Today, tuition has climbed to tens of thousands of dollars per semester in private universities. This prices them out of the reach of those who are not rich and do not want to participate in the student loan system. The latter supports bloated administrative overhead and (as we saw in the last installment) reflects the dollar’s loss of purchasing power. In accordance with corporatism’s actually having little to do with free enterprise, tuition is not set in any “free market.” It vastly exceeds what it would be worth in the free market. The universities get paid by the government, so they don’t have to worry about market discipline. Nor do those in them have the slightest incentive to care; they have no “skin in the game.” Government pays tuition and the price of the loans plus interest is tallied up. Students get stuck with tabs able to cripple their financial lives indefinitely, as we noted earlier.

All these trends would strengthen in the 2000s. The overall intellectual and educational level of the public was dropping, despite increasing technological sophistication. That wasn’t dropping, obviously. What I mean is that the average newly minted university graduate cannot walk up to a map of the world and find, e.g., Iraq, or Ukraine. They knew next to nothing of our Constitutional heritage. I made a habit of asking classes to name the four rights enumerated in the First Amendment. Most could say something about free speech; but perhaps one student in a class of 30 could name them all. I recall the kid who asked me, “Is this going to be on the test?” Sometimes I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry.

For few students at the U.S. campus where I taught as an adjunct for seven years had done any thinking about what student loans could do to their futures. They blithely assumed, even after the Meltdown of 2008, that the economy would turn around and that good-paying jobs would materialize when they graduated. The men and women on TV said so. The Millennials—quite unlike the Boomers I came up with—trust authority figures. If it’s on the 6 pm news or if a celebrity says it, it must be true. And the more an image is shown or a statement repeated, the “truer” it becomes. For example, mainstream media could regale TV viewers with a five-year-old photograph of Trayvon Martin to depict him as an innocent child who was set upon and slaughtered by the evil racist George Zimmerman, whose media image was photo-shopped and darkened to make him appear thuggish, and whose bleeding head wounds (from Martin having been on top of him pounding his head into the pavement when Zimmerman shot him in self-defense) were omitted from media accounts.

The Zimmerman-Martin case exemplifies how mainstream media slants news stories, how the public buys the slanted versions, how truthful versions are generally available only via alternative (non-corporate) media, and how because of the enormous influence of corporate media a man’s life can be ruined by reverse racism (the irony here is that Zimmerman is part Hispanic, and therefore himself a minority).

The larger picture is worse. What is not reported by mainstream media is assumed no more real than Zimmerman’s head wounds. Thus both Republican and Democratic presidents can pursue essentially the same agenda, as was noted early in this series. Voters will barely notice—even when they are being hurt by it. Take the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It was developed under two Republican administrations (Reagan, Bush I) and implemented by a Democrat (Clinton). Globalism via economic integration was taken further by another Republican (Bush II) via CAFTA and the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), and is being taken further still, behind closed doors, via the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), by another Democrat (Obama). None of this is reported on the 6 pm news; ergo, it isn’t real (or doesn’t matter).

This, of course, is the Real Matrix: a product of corporate media in many areas.

Finally, take the present-day policy of what amounts to open borders. For decades now, from hundreds of thousands to millions of people have crossed the U.S. Southern border each year illegally, to live and often work illegally in the U.S., at least until the country gives them amnesty as happened once under Reagan’s watch. Democrats want the votes of this burgeoning minority; Republicans (or their big business supporters) want the cheap labor. Both mainstream parties look the other way until a crisis develops that forces their attention.

Real education—involving history, philosophy, theology, literature, geography, foreign languages, and a study of actual cultures instead of politically correct “multiculturalism” that depicts all cultures as equals—might help a person explain why an advanced civilization that hopes to survive cannot allow everyone in who wants in, and why an absence of border security is culturally suicidal.

I’ll conclude with the question that “bakes people’s noodles.” At the very least, I’ve yet to get an intelligent response from someone who defense a mainstream perspective on these matters.

The attacks of September 11, 2001, gave us the War on Terror—the phrase that had entered the lexicon before the end of that week. Leaving aside the fact that the U.S. government had declared war on a tactic, not a real enemy as such, how does government wage a War on Terror with its Southern border wide open and admitting millions of people illegally?

Have Americans become so unable to think that they are unable to see that these two simply don’t fit together? Do America’s masses really believe the only people crossing the U.S. border are Latin Americans? Is this what their so-called “leaders” want them to think?

To be sure, that one event changed the mood of the country irreversibly and, arguably, the configuration of government from an incipient to an actual military-security police state. My main point here, to be developed in the next installment, is that the collapsed educational system prepared a gullible public for a configuration of government able to destroy what was left of their Constitutionally sanctioned freedoms amidst a climate of fear, and in which those critical of government’s rapid encroachments into every aspect of their lives could be labeled “domestic terrorists” or “extremists.”

In sum: the “culture war” accomplished two important overlapping objectives in the Real Matrix. First, those plugged in would not see the corporatizing of the universities in the Desert of the Real, destroying the capacity of those who might produce critiques of power while also entangling the next generation in a web of indebtedness. Second, they would not see how mantras about “inclusion” and “diversity” were dividing groups against one another and diverting attention from the super-elite was doing. Those few who talk about real power, are marginalized with expressions like “conspiracy theorist” and “tinfoil hat.”

Should you attend a university as universities exist now? Higher education is clearly in a bubble. A bubble is an overvalued asset. Should unpaid student loan debt continue to climb, one day the federal government will pull the plug. A lot of students—and the “adjunct” faculty teaching them—will be out in the cold, a reason I cannot recommend anyone pursue a teaching career in the present environment. Would-be students now have better options online. Some are free (Khan Academy) or quite inexpensive compared to attending classes on a campus ( and are two examples). These allow you to acquire good information in less time, on your own time, for less money. (These should not be confused with online for-profit entities like the University of Phoenix which are as expensive as standard universities and arguably provide even less. There are now many such entities. Some are probably scams, so be warned!)

I end by suggesting that the only thing sustaining the higher education bubble is support by the corporatist Matrix and the blind faith of employers. A few corporations (Google is an example) no longer have a set requirement that prospective employees must present strings of university credentials. If this catches on, or if the higher education bubble pops, a lot of campuses will be forced to close their doors. That will be their Desert of the Real.

Next: the Official-Narratives Matrix

Click here for part —–>  123456789,1011121314,

© 2014 Steven Yates – All Rights Reserved

Steven Yates has a doctorate in philosophy and currently lives in Santiago, Chile. He is the author ofFour Cardinal Errors: Reasons for the Decline of the American Republic (Brush Fire Press International, 2011). He also owns an editing business, Final Draft Editing Service.


 10 13 11 flagbar

Will America Survive?


8-7-2014 5-49-25 PM


From whence shall we expect the approach of danger? Shall some trans-Atlantic military giant step the earth and crush us at a blow? Never. All the armies of Europe and Asia…could not by force take a drink from the Ohio River or make a track on the Blue Ridge in the trial of a thousand years. No, if destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men we will live forever or die by suicide. – Abraham Lincoln

Barack Obama has become the instrument of that suicide.

In a manner reminiscent of a pubescent potentate, Obama appears to be both disengaged and autocratic as he recklessly attempts to implement his catastrophic domestic programs and a feckless foreign policy.

The maniacal pursuit of goals so at odds with the country’s values and traditions, or even its survival, can only be attributed to a flawed character and an uncompromising devotion to a demonstrably unworkable leftist ideology.

Obama, who often mistakes himself for a messiah, displays many of the characteristics of a narcissist: expecting constant praise and admiration; has a grandiose sense of self-importance; expecting others to go along with his ideas and plans; lacking empathy and taking advantage of others to achieve his own ends; regularly shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes; exaggerating his achievements or talents; thin-skinned, being easily hurt and rejected.

Narcissists are frequently detached from reality, emotionally distant from others and have a deficit of self-awareness.

It is not surprising then, that Obama, who oversees the most incompetent, unaccountable and secretive administration in US history, would have the audacity to lecture African leaders (U.S.-Africa Leaders’ Summit, August 6, 2014) on good governance, accountability and transparency:

8-7-2014 5-49-44 PM

“And so the good news — and we heard this in the summit — is that more and more countries are recognizing that in the absence of good governance, in the absence of accountability and transparency, that’s not only going to have an effect domestically on the legitimacy of a government, it’s going to have an effect on economic development and growth. ”

In contrast to previous presidents, virtually everyone, who has played an important role in the life of Barack Obama, loathes all that the United States represents e.g. Frank Marshall Davis, Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour, Bill Ayers, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, George Soros and Michelle Obama.

Obama’s politics are ideologically-driven and, like all members of the far left, are not motivated by compassion for the suffering, but by hatred of the successful. He is the poster child of the “you didn’t build that” mentality, reaching high office, not through his own achievements, but through Affirmative Action and the assistance of fellow travelers.

Modern liberals like Obama have “weaponized” altruism, that is, the belief that people should sacrifice themselves for others has been transformed into the belief that people should be forced to sacrifice themselves for others. Or, to state it more simply, liberals believe in doing good with other people’s money.

Because liberalism cannot appeal to human virtues like responsibility, ambition and hard work, they must to appeal to human weaknesses like guilt and envy and must eventually resort to deceit and coercion in order to accomplish their objectives.

The damage to America being wrought by Obama is not a question of either incompetence or intent, but a combination of both.

Obama’s worst instincts are amplified by a fawning, uncritical media and a collection of equally inexperienced, immature far-left subordinates, whose “the ends justify the means” mindset permits them to tell any lie, violate any law and even indifferently risk lives as long as it serves their political objectives.

For example, the Obama Administration not only facilitated the present underage illegal immigrant crisis on our southern border through the June 2012 deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA) executive order, but the children are now being irresponsibly used by the administration as political human shields to force Republican capitulation on amnesty.

Not since the Civil War has the United States been so politically divided.

Unlike then, when the political divisions were a natural consequence of differing opinions over slavery and states’ rights; the Obama Administration appears to have a deliberate policy to divide the country along race, ethnic, class and gender lines and undermine the nation’s economy and national security.

The challenges facing the country cannot be addressed effectively as long as Obama remains in the White House because he is intellectually and emotionally incapable of making the right decisions for America.

Abraham Lincoln prevented national suicide. Barack Obama seems to desire it.

8-7-2014 5-50-05 PM

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of “Restoring the Republic: Arguments for a Second American Revolution “. He receives email at

 10 13 11 flagbar

Sovereign citizen movement seen by US law enforcement as top terrorist threat: study


8-7-2014 2-52-40 PM

By Tom Boggioni

In a new study conducted by researchers tasked with  studying of the root causes and consequences of terrorism in the U.S. and abroad, the sovereign citizen movement was perceived to be the gravest terrorist threat, rivaling Islamist extremists and militia/patriot groups.

According to National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism —better known as START— sovereign citizens were the top concern of law enforcement, even as a belief that some domestic groups including the KKK, Christian Identity, and neo-Nazis represent less of an actual terrorist threat when compared to a previous study.

The report, complied  by START researchers David Carter, Steven Chermak, Jeremy Carter and Jack Drew,  is drawn from surveys with  more than 364 officers representing 175 state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies. Those surveys  asked respondents to to gauge their perception on the threat of terrorism, the nature of information-sharing, and their belief as to whether their agencies are prepared to deal with terrorist attacks.

In the report, found here (.pdf),  researchers write: “…there is wide variation about what groups are perceived to be a serious terrorist threat. Law enforcement is much more concerned about sovereign citizens, Islamic extremists, and militia/patriot group members compared to the fringe groups of the far right, including Christian Identity believers, reconstructed traditionalists (i.e., Odinists), idiosyncratic sectarians (i.e.,survivalists), and members of doomsday cults.”

Noting that, in the 2006-07 survey, law enforcement’s top concern was Islamic extremists, the report goes on, “The change is interesting as there was significant concern about the resurgence of the radical far right (as evidenced by the 2006 – 07 survey, as well as additional concerns raised after the 2008 election of President Barack Obama), but it appears as though law enforcement is, at present, less concerned about these groups.”

The report adds, “Such changing perceptions about what is a serious terrorist threat is an important finding because identifying and prioritizing a threat is akin to hitting a moving target and evolves as new intelligence, data, and events develop.”

START, which was funded with an initial $12 million grant from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, is supported by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Science and Technology Directorate and receives additional funding and support from a variety of Federal agencies, private foundations, and universities.

 10 13 11 flagbar