Obama Was Hand-Picked, Was NOT a Natural Born Citizen, Congress Knew It, and Tried to Protect Him

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/03/29/obama-was-hand-picked-was-not-a-natural-born-citizen-congress-knew-it-and-tried-to-protect-him/

by Dean Garrison

The further I travel down this rabbit hole, the more I feel divorced from the good conservative people that I choose to call my own. I hold some stories back from our readers. My thought is that people have a hard enough time embracing the basic fact that our government is corrupt on both sides of the aisle. If you knew how corrupt I thought these people really were, I feel like you’d rush to the phone and soon bad men would show up to haul me off in a straight jacket.

Do they still do that?

Regardless, today I want to show you something that might leave you questioning everything around you.

Welcome to my world.

In 1975 a representative named Joe Bingham introduced an amendment to remove the “natural born citizen” constitutional requirement to become President.

Why is that important?

Because it was not until almost 30 years later that the issue would be addressed again. And it was not addressed only once, but multiple times. This is all part of congressional record.

Remarkably, it just so happened to coincide with the meteoric rise of a man named Barack Obama who currently sits in the People’s House.

I am about to share with you a brilliant piece of research from the Article II Political Action Committee. After reading it the foremost question on my mind is, “If the natural born citizen definition only requires one citizen parent then why did they seemingly try so hard to change the law for Barack Obama?”

There are multiple links to official congressional documents throughout, contained in the research below, so I would urge you to draw your own conclusions.

But from my point of view this research either strongly, or at least partly, validates the following conclusions:

1. Barack Obama was hand-pickedto be President.
2. Some members of Congress, on both sides, understoodthat Obama was not “natural born” and tried to pass laws to pave the way for his arrival.
3. In the end they used a deflection tactic to shine light on John McCain’s eligibility status, hoping that Obama’s own status would not be brought into question.

It appears to have worked.

Below is a lengthy excerpt from “Article II Facts” hosted on the site of the Article II Political Action Committee. If you like what you read, I would encourage you to consider a donation to their cause.

Let’s take a trip back through recent history:

Attempts to redefine or amend Article II “natural born Citizen” Clause of the U.S. Constitution:

The effort to remove the natural-born citizen requirement from the U.S. Constitution actually began in 1975 – when Democrat House Rep. Jonathon B. Bingham, [NY-22] introduced a constitutional amendment underH.J.R. 33: which called for the outright removal of the natural-born requirement for president found in Article II of the U.S. Constitution – “Provides that a citizen of the United States otherwise eligible to hold the Office of President shall not be ineligible because such citizen is not a natural born citizen.”

Bingham’s first attempt failed and he resurrected H.J.R. 33: in 1977 underH.J.R. 38:, again failing to gain support from members of congress. Bingham was a Yale Law grad and member of the secret society Skull and Bones, later a lecturer at Columbia Law and thick as thieves with the United Nations via his membership in the Council on Foreign Relations.

Bingham’s work lay dormant for twenty-six years when it was resurrected again in 2003 as Democrat members of Congress made no less than eight (8) attempts in twenty-two (22) months, to either eliminate the natural-born requirement, or redefine natural-born to accommodate Barack Hussein Obama II in advance of his rise to power. The evidence is right in the congressional record…

1. On June 11, 2003 Democrat House member Vic Snyder [AR-2] introducedH.J.R 59: in the 108th Congress – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” – Co-Sponsors: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14]; Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10]; Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4]; Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49]; Rep LaHood, Ray [IL-18]; Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4].
2. On September 3, 2003, Rep. John Conyers [MI] introduced H.J.R. 67: – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years eligible to hold the office of President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27]
3. On February 25, 2004, Republican Senator Don Nickles [OK] attempted to counter the growing Democrat onslaught aimed at removing the natural-born citizen requirement for president in S.2128: – “Natural Born Citizen Act– Defines the constitutional term “natural born citizen,” to establish eligibility for the Office of President” – also getting the definition of natural born citizen wrong. – Co-sponsors Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK]; Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA]
4. On September 15, 2004 – as Barack Obama was about to be introduced as the new messiah of the Democrat Party at the DNC convention, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher [CA-46] introduced H.J.R. 104: – “Constitutional Amendment – “Makes eligible for the Office of the President non-native born persons who have held U.S. citizenship for at least 20 years and who are otherwise eligible to hold such Office.”  – No co-sponsors.
5. Again on January 4, 2005, Rep John Conyers [MI] introduced H.J.R. 2: to the 109th Congress – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 20 years eligible to hold the Office of President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27]
6. Rep Dana Rohrabacher [CA-46] tries again on February 1, 2005 inH.J.R. 15: – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes eligible for the Office of the President non-native born persons who have held U.S. citizenship for at least 20 years and who are otherwise eligible to hold such Office.” – No Co-Sponsor
7. On April 14, 2005, Rep Vic Snyder [AR-2] tries yet again with H.J.R. 42: – “Constitutional Amendment – Makes a person who has been a citizen of the United States for at least 35 years and who has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years eligible to hold the office of President or Vice President.” – Co-Sponsor Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4]
8. All of these efforts failing in committee and the 2008 presidential election looming with an unconstitutional candidate leading the DNC ticket, Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill, [MO] tries to attach the alteration to a military bill in S.2678: on February 28, 2008 – “Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act – Declares that the term “natural born Citizen” in article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution, dealing with the criteria for election to President of the United States, includes any person born to any U.S. citizen while serving in the active or reserve components of the U.S. armed forces.” – Co-Sponsors DNC Presidential candidate Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]; DNC Presidential candidate Sen Obama, Barack [IL]; Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ]; Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] – (This was the first effort to also assure that GOP Presidential candidate Sen. John McCain [AZ] would be cleared to run against the DNC primary victor.)

From June 11, 2003 to February 28, 2008, there had been eight (8) different congressional attempts to alter Article II – Section I – Clause V – natural born citizen requirements for president in the U.S. Constitution, all of them failing in committee — All of it taking placing during Barack Obama’s rise to political power and preceding the November 2008 presidential election.

In politics, there are no coincidences… not of this magnitude.

Finally on April 10, 2008, unable to alter or remove the natural born citizen requirement to clear the way for Barack Obama, the U.S. Senate acts to shift focus before the election, introducing and passing S.R.511: – declaring Sen. John McCain a “natural born citizen” eligible to run for and hold the office of president. There was never any honest doubt about McCain, the son of a U.S. Navy Commander. The Sponsor of the resolution is Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill, [MO]

S.R.511 States that John Sidney McCain, III, is a “natural born Citizen” under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States. S.R511passed by a 99-0 unanimous consent of the Senate, with only John McCain not voting. The basis was – “Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens;” – a condition not met by Barack Hussein Obama II. – Co-Sponsors DNC Presidential candidate Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY]; DNC Presidential candidate Sen Obama, Barack [IL]; Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT]; Sen Webb, Jim [VA]; Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (They had made certain that John McCain would run against Barack Obama)

However, in the McCain resolution is also this language – “Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the United States; – Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;”

The U.S. Constitution is not a dictionary. The definition of “is” is not in the constitution either. Yet this is the text that would later be issued inCongressional Research Service talking points memos distributed to members of congress, to protect an individual that all members of congress know and understand to be an “unconstitutional” resident of the people’s White House – Barack Hussein Obama II.

Once again, as the political left was unable to alter the U.S. Constitution by way of legitimate constitutional process, they resorted to altering the constitution via precedent setting, in short, knowingly electing and getting away with seating an unconstitutional president in order to alter Article II requirements for the office via breaking those constitutional requirements.

The press would not ask any questions and the American people were already too ill-informed of their constitution to know or too distracted by daily life to care. The press would provide the cover, swearing to the lies of an unconstitutional administration put in power by criminal actors focused only on their lofty political agenda of forever altering the American form of government.

The people would be caught up in a steady diet of daily assaults on their individual freedom and liberty and overlook the most obvious constitutional crisis in American history, the seating of an unconstitutional and anti-American president. [SOURCE CREDIT]

There you have it. Make of this what you will.

It brings about many questions for me.

Would people like Claire McCaskill and Hillary Clinton really come to John McCain’s aid if they did not have an ulterior motive?

Why were people like Inhofe, Issa, and Rohrabacher either sponsoring or co-sponsoring these pieces of legislation? After all, these men have been three of Obama’s biggest critics. We have heard lots of threats and promises from them but have seen no results. Could it be that these men are just more shining examples of “all bark and no bite”? (See Definition of “Smoke and Mirrors“)

If it is true that the definition of “natural born citizen” only involves having one citizen parent then why all the fuss?

Obama, questionable Hawaii birth certificate and all, met the requirement of one American citizen parent. Maybe the truth is that it takes more than that and Congress knows it.

So why was nothing ever done?

Keep searching and settle for nothing less than the truth.

Don’t forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

HE CAME FROM HELL AND WILL RETURN THERE WITH THE DULL AND IGNORANT!

 

A World In Change Shanghai Cooperation Organization

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/03/a-world-in-change-shanghai-cooperation.html

Rory Hall
Activist Post

We present a comprehensive review of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, including the members, the economics, the resources involved and the people. We show how this global organization is going to impact every person, business and country worldwide.

The US Dollar hegemony is dying. The Eastern countries are preparing for what is coming next. We hope you will heed the warning and begin doing your on research and plan accordingly. Everything is going to change and tomorrow will not look, nor operate, as it does today.

Alasdair Macleod from GoldMoney.com and FinanceandEconomics.org begins by introducing who is currently involved and how they relate to one another economically. Craig Hemke fromTFMetalsReport.com introduces us to the economics, currency swaps and the possibility of a gold-backed currency. Dave Kranzler from InvestmentResearchDynamics.com introduces us to some of the history and comprehensive look at the members list and explains how China may be “playing along” with the IMF regarding the SDR (Special Drawing Rights) fiat currency.

If you need to have a task completed you usually need people involved. The SCO will encompass approximately 3 billion people. That is not a typo, 3 billion people. This represents approximately half the global population. Twenty years ago most of these people were considered “poor” and from a “third world country.” Today, their wealth is growing and the countries in which they reside are becoming economic powerhouses. When the United States decided in the 1990s that we no longer wanted to be bothered with manufacturing, we shipped all those good-paying, prosperous jobs to these “third world countries” because they had lots of people willing to work for a lot less money.

This is to say nothing of the overbearing regulations that spew from Washington DC and strangle American business. Want to open a new business? Well, you had better be prepared to meet with the EPA, OSHA and Codes Administration before you begin pursuing your desire to provide for yourself, your family and your community. All of these “third world countries” are not strapped with regulations on top of regulations.

China and Russia have both opened their form of the SWIFT system. The SWIFT system is a currency clearing system that allows countries to conduct business with one another. Prior to January 2015 all currencies, the world over, were forced to use the US SWIFT. The US abused this privilege in 2012 when Iran was shut out and could not conduct business on a global scale. Their currency immediately experienced a 40% devaluation and Iran went into hyperinflation. Russia stepped in and began trading gold for oil. China quickly followed suit. Iran and Russia have been global enemies ever since.

What currency will we use to conduct business? Will it be a gold-backed currency? Will the US Dollar be around forever? Will China, Russia and the other US creditor nations continue funding the US credit card? While some of these questions seem obvious, they are not as easily answered as you may think. The US Dollar is dying. The Renminbi is rising in prominence and being used in trade all over the world. There are Renminbi/Yuan currency hubs in Vancouver, Los Angeles and The City of London, just to name some of the larger cities where one can easily conduct business, including everyday transactions, in Chinese Renminbi/Yuan. Times are changing and changing very rapidly.

According to Voxeu.org the Renminbi (RMB) is rising quickly on the global stage:

According to the Triennial Central Bank Survey (2013) in 2007, just prior to the eruption of the US subprime crisis and two years before the emergence of the Greek sovereign debt crisis, forex deals with the US dollar on one side of the transaction represented 85.6% of total average daily foreign exchange market turnover, making it the most widely traded currency in the world.1 The comparable figure for the euro was 37%, putting it in a distant second place after the dollar. By contrast, the same metric indicates that with a meager share of 0.5%, the renminbi (RMB) was ranked in the 20th slot. In April 2013, the share of the USD had gone up to 87% that of the euro, down to 33.4%, and that of the RMB up to 2,2% of total average daily forex turnover.

Although the euro lost (and the dollar gained) some ground during the six years between 2007 and 2013, the USD and the euro maintained their first and second ranks, respectively. However, the RMB climbed from the 20th to the 9th slot. Although its share is still very modest, the rate of growth of transactions involving it is very large. If as some economists believe this trend persists, the RMB may match the Japanese yen and the British pound and achieve the status of a key currency within the next decade.

What about war? History has shown time and again when there is a major monetary change there is war. The current regime does not want to relinquish power and wealth. We are hopeful this will change with the current situation. Russia, believe it or not, is actually the wild card. The East is only concerned with doing business. The Chinese are traveling the world over to insure the Yuan/Renminbi is on a steady pace to replace the US Dollar regardless of what happens.

We hope you give this a listen, allow it digest and then listen again. Above all, we hope you are aware that tomorrow will not look like yesterday. Everything is changing. Are you ready for your world to function differently?

If you do not do anything else today

WATCH THIS VIDEO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ48v1TY0I8

 

Congress Pushes Obuma backed National Biometric ID for Americans

http://thejacksonpress.org/?p=31614

Reprinted with permission from The New American

After largely failing to prod state governments into developing a national identification system known as “REAL ID,” Republican lawmakers in Congress are once again pushing an Obama-backed scheme that would force every American to have a national ID card containing sensitive biometric data. The controversial plan, embedded in an immigration-enforcement bill, has been in the works for years, but has consistently been met with stiff opposition from liberty-minded grassroots organizations and activists. While the plan has failed in previous Congresses thanks to a groundswell of opposition, critics of the measure say that without prompt action, the unconstitutional scheme could soon become a reality.

The legislation, officially dubbed the “Legal Workforce Act” (H.R. 1147), is ostensibly aimed at preventing illegal immigrants from obtaining jobs in the United States. Among the most troubling elements highlighted by critics, though, is that the bill would purport to mandate a national ID card for every American as a condition of working. It would also force every employer in America to purchase and use so-called “E-Verify technology” to check with Washington, D.C., as to whether potential employees have government permission to work. Finally, it would create a massive federal database containing sensitive data on virtually every person in the country — a database that could easily be expanded to include even more information.

While establishment lawmakers on both sides of the aisle seem fond of the measure, critics are sounding the alarm about the bill and its implications for liberty. In an e-mail to supporters urging them to help crush the unconstitutional legislation, for example, former Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas), in his capacity as chairman of Campaign for Liberty, warned that the national ID scheme would be a nightmare. Among other concerns, the two-time GOP presidential contender noted that it would allow federal bureaucrats to include biometric information — potentially including fingerprints, retinal scans, and more — that could and likely would be eventually used as a tracking device. It would also make it illegal for anyone to work in the United States without obtaining the national ID.

“Every time any citizen applies for a job, the government would know — and you can bet its only a matter of time until ‘ID scans’ will be required to make even routine purchases, as well,” Dr. Paul warned, adding that “statists in both parties have been fighting to ram their radical national ID-database scheme into law” for years. “In fact, this scheme was a key portion of the infamous so-called ‘Comprehensive Immigration Reform’ bills both parties have tried to ram through.” Now, Paul said, the statists believe they have found a way to impose their national ID: Drop the amnesty provisions and focus on immigration “security.”

According to Dr. Paul, a constitutionalist who served in Congress for more than 20 years, the term “security” is being used as “nothing more than a buzzword meant to trick Americans from all over the country into thinking that Congress is finally going to seal our southern border.” In reality, though, it means something much different. “The ‘security’ members of both parties in the U.S. House want doesn’t target any U.S. border,” Paul added. “Instead, it’s meant to create an all-out police state within them.”

Paul also warned that the national database required for the ID regime could easily expand to include information on gun ownership, medical records, political affiliation, and “virtually anything else at the stroke of a President’s pen.” In fact, the stakes are so high, he said, that this type of battle is often decisive in “whether a country remains free or continues sliding toward tyranny.” Existing abuses such as lawless NSA spying, IRS harassment, and more offer further evidence that the feds cannot be trusted with such Orwellian tools to track, monitor, and ultimately control Americans.

Despite the dangers, the legislation has already been passed out of the House Judiciary Committee, getting a vote just three days after it was introduced — and the markup took place before the text of the bill was even available online. “The speed with which this bill was rushed through Committee means the House leadership is very serious about passing this bill into law as soon as possible,” warned Paul, urging Americans to fight back immediately to prevent the bill from passing. He also warned about potential “bipartisan compromises” that could be even worse than the original.

The legislation was introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who has a dismal 54 percent in the Freedom Index, a tool provided by this magazine that scores lawmakers’ votes based on adherence to the U.S. Constitution they all swore to uphold. The controversial bill already has dozens of co-sponsors in the House, too. It is being publicly touted by Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), who claimed it would bring the “nation’s employment eligibility system into the 21st century,” as well as chief sponsor Smith.

“The Legal Workforce Act turns off the jobs magnet that attracts so many illegal immigrants to the United States,” Rep. Smith said in a statement promoting the measure, ignoring the fact that amnesty and the porous borders have been crucial in encouraging illegal immigration. “The bill expands the E-Verify system and applies it to all U.S. employers. Equally important, the American people support E-Verify,” Smith argued, citing polls showing that Americans overwhelmingly support stronger laws to stop businesses from hiring illegal immigrants. “This bill is a common-sense approach that will reduce illegal immigration and save jobs for legal workers. It deserves the support of everyone who wants to put the interests of American workers first.”

The bill also has the support of several major lobbying powerhouses — including some, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, that are infamous for their support of granting amnesty to illegal immigrants. Other organizations backing the bill include immigration enforcement-focused Numbers USA, the National Restaurant Association, the National Association of Homebuilders, and several others. However, in the past, similar national-ID schemes have met with major opposition from groups including Downsize DC, the Rutherford Institute, the American Policy Center, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, the Republican Liberty Caucus, the U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation, Conservative Republican Women, and many more.

In a letter to lawmakers about the same legislation in the 112th Congress (2011-2012), that broad coalition of organizations blasted the bill as an affront to freedom and the Constitution. Among other concerns, they said it “violates individual civil liberties such as the right to work and free speech; mandates a costly job-killing regulatory burden that cripples small business; requires employers to become enforcement agents of the federal government; and encourages identify theft of law-abiding citizens.” The bill should never have even left committee, according to opponents.

“It is anathema to limited government, the right to privacy, free enterprise and prosperity,” the coalition said in the letter to members of Congress. “It violates the philosophy of the Constitution and intent of the Framers by subordinating the liberty of citizens to the administrative convenience of government. And the Founding Fathers would have rebelled against such a staggering Federal intrusion into every workplace in the nation and our personal civil liberties.”

As The New American reported as far back as 2010, the same plot to impose a national ID on America has been pushed before by some of the leading Big Government-mongers in Congress. The “bipartisan” amnesty-national ID legislation pushed by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and backed by Obama in 2010 eventually failed due to a massive uprising against legalizing illegal immigrants. Back then, though, promoters of the biometric national ID scheme were boasting about their machinations.

“Our plan has four pillars: requiring biometric Social Security cards to ensure that illegal workers cannot get jobs; fulfilling and strengthening our commitments on border security and interior enforcement; creating a process for admitting temporary workers; and implementing a tough but fair path to legalization for those already here,” wrote Graham and Schumer in a joint op-ed promoting their legislation. “We would require all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants who want jobs to obtain a high-tech, fraud-proof Social Security card.” At the time, Obama called the proposal “a promising, bipartisan framework which can and should be the basis for moving forward.”

With the amnesty provision now out of the more recent bill — Obama is using executive decrees funded by the GOP Congress in a bid to provide amnesty anyway — analysts say the national ID plot stands a much greater chance of coming to fruition. In addition to being unconstitutional by virtue of the fact that the Constitution grants no power over identification systems to the federal government, history shows that national ID schemes are dangerous and very often abused by authorities. Considering the U.S. government’s track record, Americans can be sure that, if the plot becomes law, the ID regime will be eventually be abused as well.

If solving the illegal immigration crisis is truly the goal, there is a much simpler solution. Rather than foisting an unconstitutional national ID scheme on Americans and building a massive database, Congress could stop funding Obama’s amnesty decrees and ensure that the borders are secure. For that to happen, though, Americans who value liberty and the Constitution must get involved.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Dear Mr. Congresscritter:

According to the lies my generation were told when growing up, the Constitution was composed to protect American’s from assholes like you. For whatever reason, we believed the lies with our whole being all of our life, and now we are supposed to accept all the bullshit you are forcing down our throat as though it never existed. Please take this to the bank, we are not going to live out our lives being told which hand to use, and which direction to wipe our ass. You will pay for your treason one way or another. You will have to live out your lives underground and surrounded by armed guards, and if you become over-confident and emerge from your hole some hot head will end your miserable existence with a Malakoff Cocktail, or a well aimed brick. I am not saying it will be me because I am too old and feeble, but I assure you when I read about it I will have an orgasm that beats anything ever experienced from copulation. If there is any chance that you have just a thimble full of intelligence left, may I suggest that you start enforcing the Constitution for your own protection. And, if it’s possible you have family that you love, please consider what some out of control nasty S.O.B. might do to them. Real American’s have shed their blood and loved one’s for their freedoms, so don’t make the mistake of thinking they will lay down and be exterminated with no resistance. They are not afraid of dying and will persevere with or without guns, knives or ball bats. Can you say the same for yourself? I doubt it! You were born cowards, and will die the same way. America will never die! Olddog said that, and if you don’t like it, go piss up a rope, or OBUMAS ass.

The Real Reason the American Dream is Unraveling

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion/2015/03/the-real-reason-

the-american-dream-is-unraveling-2452824.html

 By Jim Quinn / The Burning Platform

Marketwatch posted an article this week titled Why the American Dream is Unraveling, in 4 charts. As usual, the MSM journalist and the liberal Harvard academic can create charts that reveal a huge problem, but they completely misdiagnose the causes and offer the typical wrong solution of taking more money from producers and handing it to the poor, with no strings attached. This has been the standard operating procedure since LBJ began his War on Poverty 50 years ago. Do these control freaks ever step back and assess how that war is going?

The poverty rate had plunged from 34% in 1950 to below 20% before LBJ ever declared war. It continued down to 15% just as the welfare programs began to be implemented. The percentage of people living in poverty hasn’t budged from the 15% range since the war began. This war has been just as successful as the war on drugs and the war on terrorism. Any time a politician declares war on something, expect a huge price tag and more of the “problem” they are declaring war upon.

The Federal government runs over 80 means-tested welfare programs that provide cash, food, housing, medical care, and targeted social services to poor and low-income Americans. Over 100 million Americans received benefits from at least one of these programs. Federal and state governments spent $943 billion in 2013 on these programs at an average cost of $9,000 per recipient (not including Social Security & Medicare). That is 27% of the total Federal budget. Welfare spending as a percentage of the Federal budget was less than 2% prior to the launch of the War on Poverty.

In the 50 years since this war started, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs. Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all U.S. military wars since the American Revolution. In terms of LBJ’s main goal of reducing the “causes” rather than the mere “consequences” of poverty, the War on Poverty has utterly failed. In fact, a large proportion of the population is now completely dependent upon government handouts, incapable of self-sufficiency, and enslaved in a welfare mentality that has destroyed their communities.

The primary cause of their poverty and dependency on government are the policies implemented by liberal politicians which have destroyed the family unit, promoted deviant behavior, encouraged the production of bastard children, eliminated the need for personal responsibility, provided no consequences for bad life choices, and bankrupted the nation. The rise of the welfare state has coincided with the decline of the American state. The proliferation of welfare programs has broken down the behaviors, social norms and cultural standards that lead to self-reliance, generating a pattern of growing inter-generational reliance upon government handouts. By undermining productive social norms, welfare creates a need for even greater succor in the future.

So let’s get to the four charts that supposedly reveal why the American dream is unraveling. The Marketwatch article makes the following claim:

The upper-middle-class families Putnam profiles separate themselves into affluent suburbs, with separate public schools and social spheres from those of their poorer counterparts. As a result, the poorer children not only face greater hardships, but they also lack good models of what is possible. They are effectively cut off from opportunity.

The faux journalist makes the laughable argument the reason poor children don’t succeed in life is because people who have studied hard, graduated college, succeeded in life, and moved out of poor neighborhoods have left the poor children to face hardship and lack of opportunity. This is a classic liberal storyline. Blame those who have succeeded through their own blood, sweat and tears for the failure of those who languish in poverty due to their own life choices, lack of respect for education, and lack of work ethic. Chart number one reveals one thing to the Harvard academic Robert Putnam and another to me. He believes kids of people who have a college education have some sort of unfair advantage over kids of lesser educated parents:

“The most important thing about the experience of being young and poor in America is that these kids are really isolated, and really don’t have close ties with anybody. They are completely clueless about the kinds of skills and savvy and connections needed to get ahead.”

Why are poor kids isolated, with no ties with anybody? Isolated from whom? They don’t have ties to their family? That is a ludicrous contention, supported with no facts. All kids are completely clueless. You don’t get ahead in life through savvy and connections. You have the best chance to get ahead in life through opening a book, studying hard, and getting good grades, all with the support of concerned involved parents. There are no guarantees in life, but education, involved parents, and working hard dramatically increase your odds of success. It’s not a secret formula. Putnam believes the chart below reveals that kids in households with college educated parents have an unfair advantage over kids in households without college educated parents. To me it reveals the complete and utter failure of LBJ’s Great Society programs and the feminist mantra that men aren’t necessary to raise children.

The percentage of children living in single parent households with a college educated parent is virtually the same today as it was in the early 1960’s, just under 10%. The percentage of children living in single parent households with a high school educated parent in the early 1960’s was 20%. Today that number has risen to 65%. Liberals purposely misdiagnose the problem because admitting the true cause of this disastrous trend would destroy their credibility and reveal the failure of their beloved welfare programs. The key point is that prior to LBJ’s War on Poverty less than 10% of ALL children grew up in a single parent households. Today, that number is 33%. The lesson is you get more of what you encourage and incentivize. The liberal academic solution is for college educated households to give more of their money to the high school or less educated households. Academics with an agenda never ask why their solutions haven’t worked in 50 years.

The number of households in the U.S. in 1960 totaled 53 million and there were 24 million traditional married couple with children households, or 45%. There were 3 million single parent households with children, or 6%. Today the total number of households in the U.S. is approximately 122 million and there are only 25 million with traditional married couple with children households, or 20%. Meanwhile single parent families with children households have skyrocketed to 13 million, or 11%. The war on traditional two parent families by the government, liberal mainstream media, Hollywood, feminists, and academics has been far more successful than the War on Poverty.

The drastic increase in households with fatherless children, especially in the black community, is the primary reason the poverty rate hasn’t dropped over the last 50 years. It is the primary reason poor children remain poor. It is the primary reason why every urban enclave in America continues to degenerate into dangerous, filthy, lawless ghettos.  The statistics tell the story of decline, depravity, failure, and an endless loop of poverty.

• An estimated 24.7 million children (33%) live absent their biological father.
• Of students in grades 1 through 12, 39% (17.7 million) live in homes absent their biological fathers.
• 6% of black children, 31.2% of Hispanic children, and 20.7% of white children are living absent their biological fathers.
• Among children who were part of the “post-war generation,” 87.7% grew up with two biological parents who were married to each other. Today only 68.1% will spend their entire childhood in an intact family.

Annual divorce rates are only marginally higher today than they were in the early 1960’s. So that does not account for the drastic increase in fatherless households. But, the differences among races is dramatic. Blacks divorce at a rate twice as high as whites and three times as high as Asians.

Marriage rates of Asians are almost three times higher than marriage rates of blacks. Marriage rates of whites are two times higher than marriage rates of blacks. Is it really surprising that Asian children score the highest on all educational achievement tests?

The facts prove that people (no matter what race) who marry and stay married offer their children a tremendously better opportunity to succeed academically, thereby giving them a much higher chance of moving up the socioeconomic ladder. This doesn’t mean that children from a single parent household can’t succeed. It just means they have a better chance with two parents. It’s just simple math. Two adults working together can provide higher income, more help with school work, and offer a more stable environment for the child. The liberal media and those with a social agenda scorn the traditional family as if it precludes people from living however they choose. The results of the war on families can be seen in the chart below.

The unwed birth rate stayed below 5% from 1945 through the early 1960’s. As soon as the government began incentivizing people to not get married and to have children out of wedlock, the rates skyrocketed. Today, four out of ten children are born out of wedlock. Seven out of ten black children are born out of wedlock. Only two out of ten black children were born out of wedlock in 1964. These births out of wedlock are not the result of dumb teenagers making a mistake. Almost 80% of these births are to mothers over the age of 20, with 40% of the births to mothers over the age of 25. And these horrific results are after the 55 million abortions since 1973. This didn’t happen because of women’s rights or women feeling empowered to raise children on their own. Knowledge about and access to contraceptives is not a reason for unwed pregnancies. Poor women and the men who impregnate them receive more welfare benefits by remaining unmarried and receive additional benefits by having more children out of wedlock.

So all of the data confirms the fact children who grow up in two parent households do better in school, are far less likely to be enslaved in poverty, and have a chance to succeed in life, not matter what the educational level of their parents. In the early 1960s there were very few households with college educated parents. My Dad was a truck driver and my mother was a stay at home mom until we were in high school. We were lower middle class, but all three of their children attained college degrees by studying hard, working part-time jobs to help pay for their education, and having the support of concerned parents. Could we have gotten college degrees if we had been raised by only my mother? I doubt it.

Harvard Professor Putnam prefers to ignore the politically incorrect fact that a return to traditional families would begin to reverse the 50 years of damage caused by the War on Poverty. He believes it is in the moral interest of wealthier families to help improve the economic prospects of poorer children. Liberals also don’t think the $13,000 spent per student per year is enough to educate them properly. He actually believes taking more money from producers and handing it to non-producers will boost the U.S. economy.

“The U.S. economy would get a major boost if the opportunity gap were closed. We cannot continue to live in our own bubbles, or compartments on a plate, without consequences. What I hope people take away is that helping poor kids, giving them more skills and more support would economically benefit their kids.”

The country has spent $22 trillion on the war on poverty and spends approximately $1 trillion per year, but liberal academics think if we just spend more, the complete and utter failure of their solutions will be reversed. They ignore the fact a Democratic President (Clinton) and a Republican Congress instituted welfare reform in 1996 that temporarily stopped the increase in spending, halted the rise in unwed births, and put poor people back to work. Today only one welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), effectively promotes self-reliance. Reforms that created TANF in 1996 moved 2.8 million families off the welfare rolls and into jobs. Those gains were reversed as the Obama administration and congressional leadership undid the employment and training requirements enacted 14 years ago. Liberals think it is cruel and inhumane to make poor people work.

Putnam’s final three charts just reinforce the fact traditional families, involved parents, and higher education lead to higher incomes and upward mobility for children in these settings. The reason children in households with college educated parents get more daily attention is because those households are far more likely to have two parents. The time was equal in the early 1970s when two parent families were more prevalent. Having strangers raise kids in government subsidized daycare centers as a substitute for fathers hasn’t worked out so well.

In another shocker, poor children, who are predominantly from single parent households, without a role model to replace their missing fathers, score far worse in tests that predict success in college. The key attribute to educational success is not the educational level of the parents, it’s the need for poor, middle class or wealthy households to have two parents invested in the future of their children.

Attributing obesity rates of children from non-college educated households to the parents’ education is quite a reach. In the early 1970’s the obesity rates were very close between high school educated households and college educated households. So why has it surged? The liberals claim the poor go hungry and don’t have enough food. Shouldn’t that lead to higher malnutrition rates and not higher obesity rates? Maybe the surging obesity rates are due to the government lunch programs, the fast food culture in urban ghettos, no fathers around to encourage outside activities, and using food stamps to buy junk food rather than healthier foods. Bad choices generally lead to bad outcomes. Obesity is a choice. Of course liberals now classify it as a disability which needs to be subsidized by the government.

The American dream has unraveled for many reasons. Not spending enough on welfare programs is not one of the reasons. The welfare/warfare state is bankrupt. We spend $1 trillion on welfare programs, $1.4 trillion on Social Security and Medicare, and over $1 trillion on the military/surveillance apparatus. It’s a bipartisan bankruptcy, as Republicans agree to increase the welfare state as long as the Democrats agree to increase the warfare state. The only thing sustaining this debt based house of cards is a Federal Reserve which provides zero interest financing and a never ending willingness to debase our currency to keep the status quo in power. The current rate of spending on the welfare/warfare state is unsustainable. We could voluntarily reduce the spending before the financial collapse or the spending will stop abruptly when our country undergoes a catastrophic financial implosion that will make 2008 look like a walk in the park.

Voluntarily putting the country back on a path of self reliance could be done if there was a will to do so. Reversing the culture of dependency would require a major dose of tough love that would upend the entire ideology of liberalism. Able-bodied, non-elderly adult recipients in all federal welfare programs would be required to work, prepare for work, or at least look for a job as a condition of receiving food stamps or housing assistance. This would promote personal responsibility and provide the recipients with some self respect.  Obama is a big proponent of national service, why not national service for recipients of welfare?

Anti-marriage penalties should be removed from welfare programs, and long-term steps should be taken to rebuild the family in lower-income communities. Marriage penalties occur in many means-tested programs such as food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, day care, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. The welfare system needs to be revamped to reduce these counterproductive incentives. The appeal of welfare programs as an alternative to work and marriage could be reduced by requiring able-bodied parents to work or prepare for work as a condition of receiving aid. Today government advertises in an effort to get more people to sign up for food stamps and dozens of other welfare programs. Government should be promulgating the facts on how marriage prevents social ills – poverty, poor education, juvenile crime – associated with children born to unmarried women.

Lastly, we need to cutoff the illegal influx of low-skill immigrants from the South, whose children will receive far more in welfare benefits than they pay in taxes, if they pay any taxes. The country must reject blanket amnesty or “earned citizenship” for millions of illegal immigrants who then could access the welfare system. The welfare system is already unsustainable and adding millions of illegal’s into the system would be the tipping point.

Lyndon B. Johnson’s goal was not to create an ever increasing welfare state, but to give the poor a helping hand towards self-sufficiency. His idealistic aim was to cure and prevent poverty. But, once a program is put into the hands of politicians looking to get re-elected every two years, the unintended negative consequences expand exponentially. $22 trillion later the American Dream is virtually non-existent for the 47 million Americans languishing in poverty and the once prosperous middle class who have seen their real wages stagnate due to Federal Reserve created inflation and taxes increase to pay for the ever expanding welfare/warfare state. One chart provides a major explanation of why the American Dream has unraveled, but you won’t see Obama, liberals or the mainstream media talking about it. Traditional married, two parent families are the antidote to poverty, not government welfare programs.

The debate on how to help the poor has raged for centuries. A wise Founding Father told us how the war on poverty would unfold.

“I am for doing good to the poor, but…I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed…that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.” – Benjamin Franklin

 

Creepy, Calculating and Controlling: All the Ways Big Brother Is Watching You

http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=f6eb78f457b7b8288

7b643445&id=613d650c2b&e=84f74f6a6a

By John W. Whitehead
February 16, 2015

“You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”—George Orwell, 1984

None of us are perfect. All of us bend the rules occasionally. Even before the age of over-criminalization, when the most upstanding citizen could be counted on to break at least three laws a day without knowing it, most of us have knowingly flouted the law from time to time.

Indeed, there was a time when most Americans thought nothing of driving a few miles over the speed limit, pausing (rather than coming to a full stop) at a red light when making a right-hand turn if no one was around, jaywalking across the street, and letting their kid play hookie from school once in a while. Of course, that was before the era of speed cameras that ticket you for going even a mile over the posted limit, red light cameras that fine you for making safe “rolling stop” right-hand turns on red, surveillance cameras equipped with facial recognition software mounted on street corners, and school truancy laws that fine parents for “unexcused” absences.

My, how times have changed.

Today, there’s little room for indiscretions, imperfections, or acts of independence—especially not when the government can listen in on your phone calls, monitor your driving habits, track your movements, scrutinize your purchases and peer through the walls of your home. That’s because technology—specifically the technology employed by the government against the American citizenry—has upped the stakes dramatically so that there’s little we do that is not known by the government.

In such an environment, you’re either a paragon of virtue, or you’re a criminal.

If you haven’t figured it out yet, we’re all criminals. This is the creepy, calculating yet diabolical genius of the American police state: the very technology we hailed as revolutionary and liberating has become our prison, jailer, probation officer, Big Brother and Father Knows Best all rolled into one.

Consider that on any given day, the average American going about his daily business will be monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in more than 20 different ways, by both government and corporate eyes and ears. A byproduct of this new age in which we live, whether you’re walking through a store, driving your car, checking email, or talking to friends and family on the phone, you can be sure that some government agency, whether the NSA or some other entity, is listening in and tracking your behavior. As I point out in my book, A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, this doesn’t even begin to touch on the corporate trackers that monitor your purchases, web browsing, Facebook posts and other activities taking place in the cyber sphere.

For example, police have been using Stingray devices mounted on their cruisers to intercept cell phone calls and text messages without court-issued search warrants. Thwarting efforts to learn how and when these devices are being used against an unsuspecting populace, the FBI is insisting that any inquiries about the use of the technology be routed to the agency“ in order to allow sufficient time for the FBI to intervene to protect the equipment/technology and information from disclosure and potential compromise.”

Doppler radar devices, which can detect human breathing and movement within in a home, are already being employed by the police to deliver arrest warrants and are being challenged in court. One case in particular, United States v Denson, examines how the Fourth Amendment interacts with the government’s use of radar technology to peer inside a suspect’s home. As Judge Neil Gorsuch recognizes in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeal’s ruling in the case, “New technologies bring with them not only new opportunities for law enforcement to catch criminals but also new risks for abuse and new ways to invade constitutional rights.”

License plate readers, yet another law enforcement spying device made possible through funding by the Department of Homeland Security, can record up to 1800 license plates per minute. However, it seems these surveillance cameras can also photograph those inside a moving car. Recent reports indicate that the Drug Enforcement Administration has been using the cameras in conjunction with facial recognition software to build a “vehicle surveillance database” of the nation’s cars, drivers and passengers.

Sidewalk and “public space” cameras, sold to gullible communities as a sure-fire means of fighting crime, is yet another DHS program that is blanketing small and large towns alike with government-funded and monitored surveillance cameras. It’s all part of a public-private partnership that gives government officials access to all manner of surveillance cameras, on sidewalks, on buildings, on buses, even those installed on private property.

Couple these surveillance cameras with facial recognition and behavior-sensing technology and you have the makings of “pre-crime” cameras, which scan your mannerisms, compare you to pre-set parameters for “normal” behavior, and alert the police if you trigger any computerized alarms as being “suspicious.”

Capitalizing on a series of notorious abductions of college-aged students, several states are pushing to expand their biometric and DNA databases by requiring that anyone accused of a misdemeanor have their DNA collected and catalogued. However, technology is already available that allows the government to collect biometrics such as fingerprints from a distance, without a person’s cooperation or knowledge. One system can actually scan and identify a fingerprint from nearly 20 feet away.

Radar guns have long been the speed cop’s best friend, allowing him to hide out by the side of the road, identify speeding cars, and then radio ahead to a police car, which does the dirty work of pulling the driver over and issuing a ticket. Never mind that what this cop is really doing is using an electronic device to search your car without a search warrant, violating the Fourth Amendment and probable cause. Yet because it’s a cash cow for police and the governments they report to, it’s a practice that is not only allowed but encouraged. Indeed, developers are hard at work on a radar gun that can actually show if you or someone in your car is texting. No word yet on whether the technology will also be able to detect the contents of that text message.

It’s a sure bet that anything the government welcomes (and funds) too enthusiastically is bound to be a Trojan horse full of nasty surprises. Case in point: police body cameras. Hailed as the easy fix solution to police abuses, these body cameras—made possible by funding from the Department of Justice—will turn police officers into roving surveillance cameras. Of course, if you try to request access to that footage, you’ll find yourself being led a merry and costly chase through miles of red tape, bureaucratic footmen and unhelpful courts.

The “internet of things” refers to the growing number of “smart” appliances and electronic devices now connected to the internet and capable of interacting with each other and being controlled remotely. These range from thermostats and coffee makers to cars and TVs. Of course, there’s a price to pay for such easy control and access. That price amounts to relinquishing ultimate control of and access to your home to the government and its corporate partners. For example, while Samsung’s Smart TVs are capable of “listening” to what you say, thereby allow users to control the TV using voice commands, it also records everything you say and relays it to a third party.

Then again, the government doesn’t really need to spy on you using your smart TV when the FBI can remotely activate the microphone on your cellphone and record your conversations. The FBI can also do the same thing to laptop computers without the owner knowing any better.

Government surveillance of social media such as Twitter and Facebook is on the rise. Americans have become so accustomed to the government overstepping its limits that most don’t even seem all that bothered anymore about the fact that the government is spying on our emails and listening in on our phone calls.

Drones, which will begin to take to the skies en masse this year, will be the converging point for all of the weapons and technology already available to law enforcement agencies. This means drones that can listen in on your phone calls, see through the walls of your home, scan your biometrics, photograph you and track your movements, and even corral you with sophisticated weaponry.

And then there’s the Internet and cell phone kill switch, which enables the government to shut down Internet and cell phone communications without Americans being given any warning. It’s a practice that has been used before in the U.S., albeit in a limited fashion. In 2005, cell service was disabled in four major New York tunnels (reportedly to avert potential bomb detonations via cell phone). In 2009, those attending President Obama’s inauguration had their cell signals blocked (again, same rationale). And in 2011, San Francisco commuters had their cell phone signals shut down (this time, to thwart any possible protests over a police shooting of a homeless man).

It’s a given that the government’s tactics are always more advanced than we know, so there’s no knowing what new technologies are already being deployed against without our knowledge. Certainly, by the time we learn about a particular method of surveillance or new technological gadget, it’s a sure bet that the government has been using it covertly for years already. And if other governments are using a particular technology, you can bet that our government used it first. For instance, back in 2011, it was reported that the government of Tunisia was not only monitoring the emails of its citizens but was actually altering the contents of those emails in order to thwart dissidents. How much do you want to bet that government agents have already employed such tactics in the U.S.?

Apart from the obvious dangers posed by a government that feels justified and empowered to spy on its people and use its ever-expanding arsenal of weapons and technology to monitor and control them, we’re approaching a time in which we will be forced to choose between obeying the dictates of the government—i.e., the law, or whatever a government officials deems the law to be—and maintaining our individuality, integrity and independence.

When people talk about privacy, they mistakenly assume it protects only that which is hidden behind a wall or under one’s clothing. The courts have fostered this misunderstanding with their constantly shifting delineation of what constitutes an “expectation of privacy.” And technology has furthered muddied the waters.

However, privacy is so much more than what you do or say behind locked doors. It is a way of living one’s life firm in the belief that you are the master of your life, and barring any immediate danger to another person (which is far different from the carefully crafted threats to national security the government uses to justify its actions), it’s no one’s business what you read, what you say, where you go, whom you spend your time with, and how you spend your money.

Unfortunately, privacy as we once knew it is dead.

We now find ourselves in the unenviable position of being monitored, managed and controlled by our technology, which answers not to us but to our government and corporate rulers. This is the fact-is-stranger-than-fiction lesson that is being pounded into us on a daily basis.

Thus, to be an individual today, to not conform, to have even a shred of privacy, and to live beyond the reach of the government’s roaming eyes and technological spies, one must not only be a rebel but rebel.

Even when you rebel and take your stand, there is rarely a happy ending awaiting you. You are rendered an outlaw. This is the message in almost every dystopian work of fiction, from classic writers such as George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, Philip K. Dick and Ray Bradbury to more contemporary voices such as Margaret Atwood, Lois Lowry and Suzanne Collins.

How do you survive in the American police state?

We’re running out of options. As Philip K. Dick, the visionary who gave us Minority Report and Blade Runner, advised:

“If, as it seems, we are in the process of becoming a totalitarian society in which the state apparatus is all-powerful, the ethics most important for the survival of the true, free, human individual would be: cheat, lie, evade, fake it, be elsewhere, forge documents, build improved electronic gadgets in your garage that’ll outwit the gadgets used by the authorities.”

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Please read the other article

“HOUSE BILL SEEKS TO ABOLISH PATRIOT ACT”

AND CALL OR WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND ASK [ IT ] TO SUPPORT THIS BILL!

The Surveillance State Repeal Act, H.R. 1466 [PDF],

Representatives can be identified and contacted here.

Blood Money These Companies and People Make Billions of Dollars From War

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/03/blood-money-these-companies-and-people.html

Lily Dane
Activist Post

War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it. –George Orwell

The late United States Marine Corps Major General Smedley D. Butler is perhaps most famous for his post-retirement speech titled “War is a Racket.” In the early 1930s, Butler presented the speech on a nationwide tour. It was so popular that he wrote a longer version as a small book that was published in 1935.

Butler points to a variety of examples, mostly from World War I, where industrialists whose operations were subsidized by public funding were able to generate substantial profits essentially from mass human suffering.

The work is divided into five chapters:

1. War is a racket
2. Who makes the profits?
3. Who pays the bills?
4. How to smash this racket!
5. To hell with war!

It contains this summary:

War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people.

Only a small ‘inside’ group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

What Butler was candidly describing was later referred to as the “military-industrial complex”by Dwight D. Eisenhower, who warned Americans of its existence in his farewell address in 1961:

Butler went on to say…

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few — the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.

Butler also exposed the Business Plot, an alleged plan to overthrow the U.S. government. In 1933, Butler told a congressional committee that a group of wealthy industrialist businessmen (including individuals from General Motors, Prescott Bush, grandfather of George Bush Jr., J.P. Morgan, and the Rockefeller dynasty) were planning a military coup to overthrow President Franklin D. Roosevelt, with Butler selected to lead a march of veterans to become dictator, similar to other Fascist regimes at that time. The individuals involved all denied the existence of a plot, and the media ridiculed the allegations, calling them a “gigantic hoax.”

A final report by a special House of Representatives Committee confirmed some of Butler’s testimony.

Despite warnings of its existence and imminent expansion, the military-industrial complex (or military-industrial-congressional complex) remains in operation today. It is an iron trianglethat comprises the policy and monetary relationships which exist between legislators, national armed forces, and the arms industry that supports them. These relationships include political contributions, political approval for military spending, lobbying to support bureaucracies, and oversight of the industry.

It is a major reason we are stuck in a perpetual war.

****

In their article titled Companies Profiting the Most From War, Thomas C. Frohlich and Mark Lieberman listed the 10 companies profiting the most from war. To identify them, they examined the companies with the most arms sales based on information from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

Arms sales, including advisory, planes, vehicles, and weapons, were defined by sales to military customers as well as contracts to government militaries. Also considered were each company’s 2013 total sales and profits, the total number of employees at the company, as well as nation-level military spending, all provided by SIPRI.

From the article:

U.S. companies still dominate the arms market by a large margin, with six among the top 10 arms sellers. In the top 100 arms-producing companies, 39 are based in the United States, and U.S. companies accounted for more than 58% of total arms sales among the top 100. U.S. company arms sales in the top 10 alone made up 35% of total arms sales among the top 100. By contrast, Western European companies, which make up the rest of the top 10 arms producers, accounted for just 28% of the total top 100 arms sales.

Here are the top 10 war-profiteering companies and their political ties.

10. Thales Group (Paris)
Arm sales 2013: $10.4 billion, profit: $800 million

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS: $0
LOBBYING: $520,000 (2014), $460,000 (2013) (ranks 614 of 4,065 in 2014)

REVOLVING DOOR: 9 out of 10 Thales Group lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

For a list of bills Thales Group has lobbied, click here.

Chairman Henri Proglio’s salary is rumored to be $436,128 USD.

CEO Patrice Caine’s salary has not been published.

9. Finmeccanica S.p.A. (Italy)
Arm sales 2013: $10.6 billion, profit $100 million

Not only is this company a top war profiteer, it is a huge U.S. political campaign contributor.

From OpenSecrets.org:

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS: $446,850 (ranks 696 of 16,793)
LOBBYING: $1,754,000 (2014), $1,965,500 (2013) (ranks 303 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $342,550 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $18,100
Contributions to parties: $86,200
Contributions to 527 committees: $0
Contributions to outside spending groups: $0

For a list of bills Finmeccanica S.p.A. has lobbied, click here.

Here’s some additional information on this company:

The total of contributions to candidates from Finmeccanica SpA PACs is 24 times larger than contributions from individuals.

REVOLVING DOOR: 21 out of 34 Finmeccanica SpA lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

CEO Mauro Moretti’s “wage packet” is said to be $1.2 million USD.

8. United Technologies (U.S.)
Arm sales 2013: $11.9 billion, profit $5.7 billion

United Technologies might be the lowest ranking of the U.S. companies in this list, but don’t let that fool you.OpenSecrets bestowed the company with the label “heavy hitter”, which means it is “one of the 140 biggest overall donors to federal elections since the 1990 election cycle, as compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.”

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS: $2,105,245 (ranks 124 of 16,793)
LOBBYING: $15,738,000 (2014), $13,900,373 (2013) (ranks 13 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $1,769,400 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $199,250
Contributions to parties: $124,470
Contributions to 527 committees: $10,625
Contributions to outside spending groups: $1,500

For a list of bills United Technologies has lobbied, click here.

Here’s some additional information on this company:

The total of contributions to candidates from United Technologies PACs is 19 times larger than contributions from individuals.

REVOLVING DOOR: 52 out of 70 United Technologies lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

24 Congressional members own United Technologies shares (for the list, click here).

CEO Gregory J. Hayes has a reported annual salary of $949,583 and an annual bonus of $1,600,00, for a total annual compensation of $2,549,583.

7. Airbus Group (France/Netherlands)
Arm sales 2013: $15.7 billion, profit $2 billion

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS:  $365,752 (ranks 855 of 16,793)
LOBBYING: $3,288,178 (2014), $3,749,750 (2013) (ranks 156 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $259,322 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $83,500
Contributions to parties: $22,930
Contributions to 527 committees: $0
Contributions to outside spending groups: $0

For a list of bills this company has lobbied, click here.

Additional information about Airbus Group:

The total of contributions to candidates from Airbus Group PACs is 4 times largerthan contributions from individuals.

REVOLVING DOOR: 42 out of 57 Airbus Group lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

6. General Dynamics (U.S.)
   Arm sales 2013: $18.7 billion, profit $2.4 billion

   OpenSecretslabeled this company a “heavy hitter”, which means it is “one of the 140 biggest overall donors to federal elections since the 1990 election cycle, as compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.”

General Dynamics is one of the nation’s top defense contractors, assembling virtually every type of military machinery engaged in modern combat. The company builds warships, nuclear submarines, tanks and combat jets, not to mention the command and control systems that link all of these technologies together. The company has lobbied hard to encourage lawmakers to step up appropriations for the Navy, one of the company’s biggest clients.

It has fought attempts to shrink the nation’s fleet of submarines and warships, thereby helping block Defense Department attempts to shift that money to other facets of the nation’s land and air defenses.

Details:

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS: $1,974,599 (ranks 140 of 16,793)
LOBBYING: $10,720,923 (2014), $11,066,974 (2013) (ranks 27 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $1,405,525 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $401,300
Contributions to parties: $162,974
Contributions to 527 committees: $4,350
Contributions to outside spending groups: $5,450

For a list of bills this company has lobbied, click here.

More information about General Dynamics:

The total of contributions to candidates from General Dynamics PACs is 6 times larger than contributions from individuals.

6 Congressional members own shares in this company (click here for the list).

REVOLVING DOOR: 96 out of 133 General Dynamics lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

CEO Phebe Novakovic earned nearly $19 million in total compensation in fiscal 2014.

5. Northrop Grumman (U.S.)
Arm sales 2013: $20.2 billion, profit $2 billion

We’ve got another heavy hitter here:

Northrop Grumman is the fourth largest defense contractor and the world’s largest builder of naval vessels as of 2010. As a member of the miscellaneous defense industry, Northrop Grumman specializes in aerospace systems, electronic systems, information systems, ship building and technical services.

Northrop Grumman focuses much of its efforts securing government defense contracts and earmarks. During the 2008 election cycle, people and political action committees associated with Northrop Grumman contributed more than $2 million to federal candidates and committees, favoring Democrats slightly.

Details:

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS $4,050,624 (ranks 45 of 16,793)
LOBBYING $10,216,960 (2014), $20,590,000 (2013) (ranks 28 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $2,613,112 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $1,194,560
Contributions to parties: $231,602
Contributions to 527 committees: $6,000
Contributions to outside spending groups: $5,350

For a list of bills this company has lobbied, click here.

More information about Northrop Grumman:

The total of contributions to candidates from Northrop Grumman PACs is 9 times larger than contributions from individuals.

REVOLVING DOOR: 32 out of 49 Northrop Grumman lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

6 Congressional members own shares in this company (for the list, click here).

CEO Wesley G. Bush’s total pay package, including the change in the value of his pension, was $18.6 million in 2013, reports The Washington Post. His salary and stock awards remained steady at about $1.5 million and $8 million, respectively.

4. Raytheon (U.S.)
Arm sales 2013: $29.9 billion, profit $2 billion

OpenSecrets has identified Raytheon as a heavy hitter:

Raytheon is a major American defense contractor that specializes in defense and homeland security technology. As the world’s largest producer of guided missiles, Raytheon specializes in manufacturing defense systems and defense electronics.

A member of the defense electronic industry, Raytheon is most active lobbying on defense, homeland security and federal budget appropriation issues. Until 2008, individuals and political action committees associated with Raytheon had favored Republicans in campaign contribution giving, but after Democrats won both chambers of Congress and the White House, the defense firm favors Democrats, giving 55 percent of campaign contributions to Democrats and 45 percent to Republicans in 2008

Considering that access is needed when securing large government defense contract, it’s of little surprise that Raytheon spends millions of dollars each year lobbying the federal government. Raytheon is the primary manufacturer of Tomahawk cruise missiles, dozens of which have been used by U.S. and British military forces in strikes against targets in Libya during 2011.

Details:

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle:
CONTRIBUTIONS: $3,588,668 (ranks 58 of 16,793)
LOBBYING: $6,250,000 (2014), $7,650,000 (2013) (ranks 65 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $2,131,300 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $1,212,783
Contributions to parties: $236,498
Contributions to 527 committees: $6,037
Contributions to outside spending groups: $2,050

For a list of bills Raytheon has lobbied, click here.

More information about this company:

The total of contributions to candidates from Raytheon PACs is 11 times larger than contributions from individuals.

REVOLVING DOOR: 51 out of 67 Raytheon lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

8 Congressional members own shares in this company (click here for a list).

CEO Thomas A. Kennedy made $5,324,743 in total compensation for fiscal 2013.

3. BAE Systems (U.S./United Kingdom)
Arm sales 2013: $26.8 billion, profit $275 million

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS: $1,360,369 (ranks 210 of 16,793)
LOBBYING: $3,920,000 (2014), $4,635,000 (2013) (ranks 124 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $931,389 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $301,750
Contributions to parties: $120,980
Contributions to 527 committees: $5,500
Contributions to outside spending groups: $3,250

For a list of bills BAE Systems has lobbied, click here.

More details:

The total of contributions to candidates from BAE Systems PACs is 9 times largerthan contributions from individuals.

REVOLVING DOOR: 27 out of 36 BAE Systems lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

CEO Ian King’s total annual compensation is $3,826,308.

2. Boeing (U.S.)
Arm sales 2013: $30.7 billion, profit $4.6 billion

Boeing has been labeled a heavy hitter by OpenSecrets:

Boeing is the world’s top manufacturer of commercial airplanes, including well-known aircraft such as the 787 and the 747. The company is also a leading military supplier, making fighter-bombers, transport planes and the Apache helicopter.

 

Along with rival Lockheed Martin, the company regularly lobbies Congress to win military contracts and increase defense spending. Boeing is a major supporter of free trade, especially in Asia, where it has focused on selling more planes. The company also lobbies on environmental rules and transportation regulations, among other issues.

Boeing is also a large recipient of government loan-guarantees, primarily coming from the Export-Import Bank of the United States.

Details:

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS: $3,227,934 (ranks 67 of 16,793)
LOBBYING: $16,800,000 (2014), $15,230,000 (2013) (ranks 10 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $2,536,149 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $398,276
Contributions to parties: $252,685
Contributions to 527 committees: $33,749
Contributions to outside spending groups: $79,325

For a list of bills Boeing has lobbied, click here.

More information on this company:

The total of contributions to candidates from Boeing PACs is 6 times larger than contributions from individuals.

REVOLVING DOOR: 83 out of 115 Boeing Co lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

17 Congressional members own Boeing shares (click here for the list).

CEO W. James McNerney Jr. made $23,263,562 in total compensation in 2013. Of this total $1,930,000 was received as a salary, $12,920,972 was received as a bonus, $3,763,503 was received in stock options, $3,763,534 was awarded as stock, and $885,553 came from other types of compensation. He earned $23.5 million total in 2014.

1. Lockheed Martin (U.S.)
Arm sales 2013: $35.5 billion, profit $3 billion

As the top war profiteer on this list, it should be no surprise that Lockheed Martin is ranked as a heavy hitter by OpenSecrets:

Lockheed Martin is the nation’s top defense contractor, the brains behind such high-tech military hardware as the F-16 jet fighter and a variety of land and sea missiles. In 2001, the company landed the biggest defense contract in history when it was named the main contractor for the Joint Strike Fighter.

Considering that access is the name of the game when securing such lucrative contracts, it’s no surprise that Lockheed splits its campaign money equally between Democrats and Republicans. All told, NASA and the Defense Department account for roughly 80 percent of the company’s annual sales.

Details:

Profile for 2014 Election Cycle
CONTRIBUTIONS: $4,132,497 (ranks 44 of 16,793)
LOBBYING: $14,581,800 (2014), $14,516,226 (2013) (ranks 16 of 4,065 in 2014)
Contributions to candidates: $3,001,928 (for a list of recipients, click here)
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $897,425
Contributions to parties: $219,086
Contributions to 527 committees: $5,585
Contributions to outside spending groups: $10,373

For a list of bills Lockheed Martin has lobbied, click here.

Additional information about this company:

The total of contributions to candidates from Lockheed Martin PACs is 7 times largerthan contributions from individuals.

REVOLVING DOOR: 69 out of 109 Lockheed Martin lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs.

CEO Marillyn Hewson earned $25.16 million in 2014. Of this total, $1.34 million was base salary, $8.16 million was stock awards, $5.98 million was from incentive plan compensation, $9.41 million was in pension earnings, and other compensation was $238,150.

As you can see, many companies and individuals – including politicians – stand to profit greatly from perpetual war.

And we, the taxpayers, are footing the bill.

Every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying $312,500 for cost of military action against ISIS. 

Every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying $10.17 million for cost of war in Afghanistan. 

Every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying $365,297 for cost of war in Iraq. 

Every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying $10.54 million for total cost of wars since 2001. 

Every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying $8.43 million for Homeland Security Since 9/11. 

Every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying $58 million for the Department of Defense.
For a live ticker showing how much we have paid to date in each of the categories above, please visit the National Priorities Project site. You also can use the site’s trade-off tool to see what else those dollars could buy.

The full costs of war cannot simply be measured in dollars. It is impossible to place a monetary value on the tremendous loss of life (both military and civilian) caused by perpetual war.

Since 2003, U.S. military deaths in Afghanistan total 2,356. UK military deaths total 453, and there have been 677 coalition military deaths from other countries.

Since 2003, U.S. military deaths in Iraq total 4,489. UK military deaths total 179, and there have been 140 coalition military deaths from other countries.

There have been 136,495 – 154,378 documented civilian deaths that resulted from military intervention in Iraq since 2003.

In Iraq, 1,487 contractor employees have died. 348 journalists have been killed. 448 academics have died.

To view information on 6,840 U.S. service members who have perished in Afghanistan and Iraq, please see Faces of the Fallen.

Deaths don’t only occur in combat. An unusually high percentage of young veterans have died since returning home, many as a result of drug overdose, suicide, and vehicle crashes, reports Costs of War. The suicide rate doubled in the Army during the first decade of the wars among both the deployed and the non-deployed.

In many ways, the people of Afghanistan and Iraq are worse off now than they were before U.S. military invasion. Both countries are considered more authoritarian, more corrupt, and more repressive than they were before.

****

In his piece titled A State of Perpetual War, David A. Love makes a fitting comparison:

In the George Orwell classic 1984, there is a state of perpetual war between the nations of Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia. The enemy in the conflict is ambiguous, and the battlefield exists in an elusive and distant land. The enemy could be Eurasia one day, and Eastasia the next, but that location is really insignificant.

The mission of perpetual war for these superpowers is to justify psychological and physical control over their populations, to keep their people busy, fearful and hateful towards the enemy. The perpetual war also serves as an excuse for a nation’s failings and shortcomings. The economy, the labor force and industry are all centered around war rather than consumer goods. People live a miserable existence with poverty and no hope of improving their standard of living.

Love points out that there are bigger problems we should be concerned about:

…there are many domestic threats that seem to pose a greater risk to national security, including the U.S. economic system itself.

He concludes with:

If we are to have a perpetual war, it must be a war against injustice and deprivation at home and abroad. We need to get our own house in order, rather than demolish and rebuild other nations that did not invite us there. And as far as the so-called terrorism problem is concerned, maybe we should stay out of other folks’ backyards and it will go away.

Indeed, the authorities would like us to believe that “fighting for our freedoms” in lands thousands of miles away is a necessary evil.

In War is a Racket, Butler suggested the following three steps to smash the war racket:

1. We must take the profit out of war.
2. We must permit the youth of the land who would bear arms to decide whether or not there should be war.
3. We must limit our military forces to home defense purposes.

Butler concluded his speech with the following exclamation:

TO HELL WITH WAR!

That seems like an appropriate conclusion here as well.

Additional Resources:

• Pay Any Price: Greed, Power, and Endless War by James Risen
• Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World by Tom Engelhardt
• National Security and Double Government by Michael J. Glennon
• Lords of Secrecy: The National Security Elite and America’s Stealth Warfare by Scott Horton
• The Iron Triangle: Inside the Secret World of the Carlyle Group by Dan Briody
• Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare by Gareth Porter

Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple, where this article first appeared. Her goal is to help people to “Wake the Flock Up!”

 OLDDOGS COMMENTS

If only the young were properly educated there would be no participants in these slaughters. Alas, homo sapiens seem to be attracted to violence as a means of gaining status, or a sense of duty to those who detest them. The real bummer is finding out after you have murdered several innocent people that you were beguiled from infancy by the movers and shakers of the world. Yes! They formed your mind into a little mass of obedience. I often wonder if it is fair that the Lord God made a way for us to be forgiven.

We sure as hell do not deserve it.

AN HONERABLE COMMON SENSE CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT

http://www.newswithviews.com/Ewart/ron196.htm

By Ron Ewart
March 25, 2015
NewsWithViews.com

“Common sense is in spite of, not the result of, education.” —Victor Hugo

“Government corruption, overly complex legislation, bureaucratic inefficiency and over-educated academic idiots smother COMMON SENSE.” —Ron Ewart

Only men with the strongest resolve can resist and not be corrupted by the influence of importance and position. —Thomas Paine, in his book Common Sense, wrote this:

“Men who look upon themselves born to reign, and others to obey, soon grow insolent; selected from the rest of mankind their minds are early poisoned by importance; and the world they act in differs so materially from the world at large, that they have but little opportunity of knowing its true interests, and when they succeed to the government are frequently the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions.”

Without honor in the people and in government, there can be no freedom. Position, perceived importance and the almost assured corruption that results there from, always poisons the well of honor if men are not, by nature, honorable. That brings us to the subject of this article.

In about one second you are going to think that the conservative author who has been writing the articles you have been reading for these last 10 years, has lost his mind. Not hardly!

It is said that anyone can run for president in America ….. and win. Over the ten years we have been writing articles on freedom and property rights, we have had several readers suggest we should run for president and others who said they would vote for us, if we did run, even if the idea is nothing more than a fantasy. We have resisted the idea for many reasons, the first being, only a fool would subject him or herself and their family to the kind of media scrutiny and feeding frenzy that a presidential candidate must endure, especially a conservative candidate.

However, with the plethora of candidates now allegedly running for the conservative ticket and many of those candidates just a replay of the same old tired political games, we have decided to explore the possibility of being a serious candidate for President, as improbable as that might seem.

There must be a thousand reasons why we shouldn’t run, but if you are wondering why we would make such a bold move, all you need to do is read our last 500 articles describing the down hill slide of America, directly caused by Progressive policies. We can’t stand by and watch that happen to the country we love without doing something more than just writing articles.

We have over 40 years of hands-on business experience as an entrepreneur employing many people; we worked with the federal and state government as a contractor, we have over 30 years in land use and real estate investment experience giving us a broad knowledge of the law and how government works; we wrote a book on real estate fundamentals and how to develop property; we served on a local government planning commission; we served eight years with a major city chamber of commerce as a director and vice president; as a pro se attorney we personally sued a multi-national corporation and won: we have become a nationally known conservative author; we are well read in most of the science disciplines; have significant knowledge of American history and equally important, we have the wisdom of age. Our education came from graduating from the school of hard knocks and we don’t back down from bullies. We are blessed with good health and boundless drive and energy.

Have we made mistakes, of course, everyone does. But why would we be any less qualified than a community organizer from Chicago whose only attributes are that he is arrogant, a narcissist, a reverse racist, devoid of honor and has a radically distorted view of America from which he governs?

In a recent NY Post article, they said this about Obama:

“First he comes for the banks and health care, uses the IRS to go after critics, politicizes the Justice Department, spies on journalists, tries to curb religious freedom, slashes the military, throws open the borders, doubles the debt and nationalizes the Internet. He lies to the public, ignores the Constitution, inflames race relations and urges Latinos to punish Republican “enemies.” He abandons our ¬allies, appeases tyrants, coddles ¬adversaries and uses the Crusades as an excuse for inaction as Islamic terrorists slaughter their way across the Mideast.”

This is how Obama has governed America for six years and it is tragic if not treasonous. It is obviously not how we would govern.

Many of our readers will say we haven’t a chance to be nominated as the Republican front-runner to face whomever the Democrats finally bring to the fore and they might be right. But before the reader makes up his or her mind, we ask that he or she review the platform we would put forth under the banner “A Common Sense Conservative Candidate“. The reader may just find that they agree with our platform more than they disagree. Most of our platform came from the “18 Principles For A Free America” we wrote several years ago that appears on our website. Our platform could very well be used to compare against the platforms of the current cadre of conservative presidential candidates.

We lean heavily towards strict constitutionalism and free enterprise. On the domestic front, the down sizing of government and the privatization of many government functions would be one of our first priorities. Elimination of many government bureaucracies would be the second priority. Shaking up the IRS and the EPA and other out-of-control cabinet level agencies, repealing and replacing Obama Care and closing the border would be the third.

On the foreign front we will take very seriously the constitutional clause and oath that requires the president to protect and defend the American people from all enemies, foreign or domestic, not forgetting America has many domestic enemies as well as foreign. Most of the domestic enemies fall into the flawed ideology of Progressivism that has led us down the path to financial ruin and the continuing loss of liberty. We guarantee everyone that we would not back down from, or appease national or international bullies, no matter how large or small they may be.

Our administration would be one of inclusion and transparency, to the best of our ability and transparency will not be just a campaign slogan. We do not intend to follow in the footsteps of the current president, or the alleged, presumptive Democrat, seriously flawed, hopelessly corrupt, female front-runner. Re-election to a 2nd term, or party considerations, will never be factors in making decisions for America and the American people.

OUR PLATFORM

We have taken the issues one by one that a president would face while in office. Common sense will be our guide in almost everything, but still recognizing that common sense is not necessarily the solution to some complex problems. If you haven’t already convinced yourself that we have no chance at winning the Republican nomination, we strongly suggest that you review our platform, as laid out in detail on our website here.

To get our common sense message out to the public, we will need supporters to set up speech venues for us in every state, obtain petitions to put us on the ballot in each state and provide the funds for our expenses. We will also need a pro bono legal firm to make sure we comply with all political campaign laws. To embark upon this kind of effort, is not only time consuming, it is expensive. Without the support from thousands of those of like mind, the effort is futile.

For now, we will be exploring the possibilities of running for president by using specific web pages on our existing NARLO website, as we did with our Platform. NARLO is a nationally known organization and our website receives considerable traffic. Early funding for exploring the possibility will come from the sale of NARLO products, memberships, or donations. Thus, we are asking that you help us with DONATIONS and tell your rural landowner friends about our powerful, legally intimidating 18″ x 24″ aluminum No Trespassing sign and our unique, one-of-a-kind Rural Landowner Handbook that is not available anywhere else.

In addition, we have uploaded 4 years (over 200) of our copyrighted weekly articles to a USB Flash Drive in Microsoft WORD format. If you have enjoyed our articles and want an in depth glimpse into our general philosophy and how we would govern, we have made the articles available here.

Even if we don’t win which is quite possible, it will give us a large platform and a much larger audience to extol the virtues of this great county and perhaps change some minds along the way.

We’d like to know what you think.
• If you think we should run, click this link.
• If you think we’re a fool to run, click this link.
• If you would donate to our effort, click this link.
Then hit SEND after clicking one or more of the links.

We will assess the responses and make our decision. If this article goes viral, as we hope it will, we might just have a shot.

[NOTE: The forgoing article represents the opinion of the author and is not necessarily shared by the owners, employees, representatives, or agents of the publisher.]

© 2015 Ron Ewart — All Rights Reserved

Ron Ewart, a nationally known author and speaker on freedom and property issues and author of his weekly column, “In Defense of Rural America”, is the President of the National Association of Rural Landowners, (NARLO) (http://www.narlo.org) a non-profit corporation headquartered in Washington State, an advocate and consultant for urban and rural landowners. He can be reached for comment at info@narlo.org.

Website: www.narlo.org

E-Mail: info@narlo.org

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

IF HE CAN STAY ALIVE LONG ENOUGH TO ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING HE WILL HAVE MY SUPPORT FOR LIFE. KEEP YOUR EYE OUT FOR HILLARY RON. THAT MEANS WATCH YOUR BACK!

 

LEARN MORE ABOUT ONE OF THE SHORT ROUTES LEADING TO INSTITUTIONAL SLAVERY AND MUCH MORE

WALKING UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT A MAJOR TOOL USED BY AGENDA 21 & SENATOR JAKE FILES SUCCESSFUL EFFORT TO EXPAND GOVERNMENT’S EMINENT DOMAIN TAKEOVER?

www.arkansasfreedom.com

By E.G. DIANE MORRISON

BORDERS, BOUNDRIES, MANAGEMENT, CONTROL & DOMINATION.

The transmitter of SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT legislation to Ark. state legislators is identified as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) an instrument of Agenda 21. Senator Files belongs as do most Republican Senate & House members to this freedom-killing organization.

Some excerpts of the goals of Agenda 21/SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.

Agenda 21 proposes and is intended to be implemented on EVERY PERSON on earth…it calls for specific changes for ALL PEOPLE.

563 American cities have already implemented Agenda 21…is Fort Smith one of the 563?

1. LAND…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures & inefficacies of the market.
2. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS…will have to take a backseat to the COLLECTIVE.
3. Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require A PROFOUND REORIENTATION OF ALL HUMANS, UNLIKE ANYTHING THE WORLD HAS EVER EXPERIENCED.
4. A VIEW OF WHAT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE—single family homes, paved & tarred roads, dams & reservoirs, power line construction, plowing of soil, raising of livestock, etc. etc. etc. (See “Agenda 21 in One Easy Lesson” by Tom DeWeese,4/6/11, News with Views)

Citizens, have you noticed the recent frenzy induced by the Fort Smith city government or was it induced by the state & federal government, pertaining to Bikeways, Walkways, Trails, and the city/county governments’ activities in promoting Parks, a Water Park, Softball Complexes, etc?  Why the sudden interest? Consider, if you will, “Bread & Circuses”, that is keeping the majority of the masses entertained, liken to Pavlov’s dogs, e.g. conditioned responses. In this particular case, entertainment venues compliments of the F.S. city government, but all paid for by gullible taxpaying citizens. The ultimate goal?

A Roman poet, Juvenal, circa AD 100, displayed his contempt for Roman politicians that passed laws in 140 BC to keep the votes of poorer citizens by introducing a “grain dole”: giving out cheap food & entertainment, i.e. “BREAD & CIRCUSES”, and quickly became the most effective way to rise to power. Can you say America today, or in this case, Fort Smith today?

Are these wonderful entertainment venues set in place by politicians and bureaucrats out of the kindred spirit for “public service”, or is there another agenda/motive?

The answer is absolutely yes!  It is called “SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT”, the god of globalism and its goals.  While citizens enjoy Bread & Circuses they are subjected to more indoctrination & conditioning unbeknownst to them. The result is ordinary citizens coming to rely wholly on government for all things provided by the increasing throngs of so-called “public servants” who claim they are diligently laboring to better the lives of us Ordinaries—do you believe that?

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT is the battle cry of the United Nations and U.S. governments, and is vigorously being promoted globally. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT’S progenitor is the U.N.’s Agenda 21=CITIZEN CONTROL.

Now you say, our Fort Smith Board of Directors and other hired public servants, e.g. City Manager Ray Gosack, would never be involved in promoting freedom & property-taking programs.  Unfortunately there’s reason to believe some Board members do not comprehend the destructive concepts of SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT and its far reaching deleterious effects on citizens.  Be aware that City Manager Gosack and his handlers, accompanied by Sebastian County Judge David Hudson, must be aware of SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.  They are longtime wards of government, therefore they do not possess the political freedoms or willingness to govern & advocate with & for independent resolutions. Their voices & acts echo only the instructions meted out by their respective government unions who have no regard for middleclass citizen concerns.  OBSERVE!

Have you noticed that all the above listed endeavors, Trails, Parks, etc. have already reached fruition in the quad-cities of NW Arkansas? Do you believe Fort Smith’s efforts are simply a coincidence?

Note the activities of the Frontier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), an unelected Non-governmental Organization (NGO).  Circa 2014 the moribund Frontier NGO arose from the sands like a Phoenix and now presumes and in actuality is the unelected chief advocate & promoter for Bikeways, Pedestrian Walkways & the Trails and other development projects, so say some elected officials.  Therefore: who are the stakeholders in the Frontier MPO and what is their game? Some would say “public service”, I say, “Go to the back of the class”.

The city of Fort Smith pays dues to an entity called Western Arkansas Development & Planning in the amount of about $26,000 per year. The organization’s function is to take over every facet of citizens’ private lives in F.S. as will be shown as this article continues. The organization has 7 departments, one of which, for example, is RITA (an NGO) and Republican State Representative Matt Pitsch is the CEO, unelected, the authority, funded by whom and how much?

Recent statistics indicate there are at least 22 NGO’s in Fort Smith—all unelected & appointed, exercising immense control & power over our lives.

The Frontier MPO (an NGO) is under the heavy hand of Cultureal Marxist planner Diane Morrison and is funded by the Arkansas state & federal governments.  By how much? City sources say, at this point, Fort Smith does not fund, but Morrison claims that the city will contribute for openers $17 million to the projected Trail System, in addition to continuing state & national funding. Morrison is the CEO of the Frontier MPO and is a salaried position…how much & who appointed Morrison & under what authority? Officials relate that Morrison has sole authority over the Trails Project & other development projects. What are the development projects? Are Morrison & her Frontier MPO presently involved in financial arrangements pertaining to the construction of the projected multi-county Trail System?

Another example of elected officials delegating their responsibilities to unelected persons, accompanied by little or no oversight.

Morrison’s website claims she has expertise in 34  areas dealing with SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, all  having to do with the reshaping & remodeling (removal of private property) of every facet of the city of Fort Smith and is comfortable using the term SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT in her job description; the reason I label her a Cultural Marxist.  Her planning calls for the ultimate demolition of all citizen privacies & rights. It is oxymoronic that Ms. Morrison’s involvement in Cultural Marxist philosophies has to be subsidized by a free enterprise society.

Specific questions have been submitted to some elected officials pertaining to the Frontier MPO and other subjects relating to citizen concerns, e.g. financial contracts made with American Resort Management. At this juncture far more questions arose than were answered—authority, contracts, grants, salaries, etc.. Is it a cover-up or do they simply not know?

FOIA’s have been submitted to City Manager Gosack & County Judge Hudson. The results will be reported.

Under the guise of transparency, city government and the Frontier MPO have previously orchestrated 3-4 “window dressing” meetings to sell the Trail System.  Meetings were sparsely attended and in the main attendees were self-servers, e.g. bicycle shop owners.  Probably less than a combined attendance of 100 individuals in a metroplex of 150,000 or more residents and being directed by an unelected state/federal body…they and the city government have forcibly & brazenly usurped the rights of Fort Smith citizens.

Citizens, do you want 100 or less individuals to dictate the tenor of business for 150,000-? Why don’t the City Manager, Mayor & Board of Directors take responsibility themselves for the 87 mile inter-counties Trail system and subject themselves to questions regarding SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? Again, statements made by some elected officials would suggest they are oblivious to the ultimate goals of the Trail System being proposed to citizens as eye-candy.

Four more of the so-called public open-houses for Trails discussion are scheduled beginning this month and are to be held in Greenwood, Pocola, Van Buren, and Fort Smith.  Certainly not a local program, nor is it intended to be.

Again, the question must be asked—why all of a sudden the volcanic interest in Trails? Do Ft. Smith politicians, bureaucrats & aspiring Insiders possess an insatiable appetite to spend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to satisfy the desires of a hundred people or less, or is there another agenda?

Yes! it is one of  Agenda 21’s children, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.  Bread & Circuses you know—keep the majority of the masses preoccupied, fat, entertained and uninformed and they will gleefully walk into the flytrap & won’t know what hit them when the tent of freedom collapses.  Precisely, the physical & mental state of many if not most Americans.

The majority of the masses are ignorant. The word ignorant is not to be interpreted as denigrating or hateful.  It simply means–Absent Facts.

Many Americans, I believe, are aware of corrupt political & bureaucratic shell games, cover-ups, and diversions that impregnate every facet of American governments, but do not understand how to identify.

The implementation of Trail Networks is being pursued globally, instrumented by the United Nations & global governments as Job One and guarantees, in the near term, limitations on the types of transportation allowed, via the gerrymandering of  borders, boundaries, traffic patterns, while controlling and limiting destinations. The reconfiguring of housing models (stack & pack), mass rationing & a takeover of all privately held natural resources, e.g. waterways.  Additionally another right to be forcibly taken is our right to private property. Laws are being passed presently which provide cover for the unconstitutional & the vile act of private property confiscation; witness Arkansas SB 757 introduced by Fort Smith Republican Senator Jake Files.  See below.

Plentiful entertainment venues, incorporated with other so called freebies, make it much easier for governments (police, fire, game wardens, forest rangers, et al) to control and manage populations. Notice: these agencies are all militarized and take their orders from national & international governments and NGO’s, not from you or me.

If you believe government is protecting your God-given & Constitutional rights, you are indeed ignorant (observe the number of laws, regulations, codes, etc. being passed currently by the Arkansas General Assembly—over 2,000). Much of the legislation in this session is being promulgated by outside interests, corporations & “non-profits” (NGO’s), to whit Senator Jake Files’ SB 757 gives the Arkansas state government power to preempt private property, i.e. expand state government’s Eminent Domain capacities, resulting ultimately in the elimination of private property—SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.

In one section of SB 757 there are 15 points that lead to NO RECOVERY FOR CONFISCATED PROPERTY.

The Bill is a quagmire of slick political legalese. SB 757 also limits government compensation to private property owners, denying Constitutional rights.

Senator Files is in the quid-pro-quo business, e.g. $2 million state taxpayer dollars to the projected Fort Smith Marshall’s Museum in exchange for an ownership in a huge softball complex, much if not most is to be funded by taxpayers.

SB 757 was funneled to Senator Files & the Republican dominated General Assembly by the freedom-killing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). ALEC is the genesis of much legislation offered and passed in state assemblies.

Realtors, contractors, Morrison with her 34 areas of Cultural Marxism; (e.g. multiple planning’s, grants, outreaches & “place making”, consulting, etc.) attorneys, bureaucracies, government expansion, etc. to name a few will make millions with the implementation of Files SB 757 with the help of his RINO buddies.

To bring that statement even closer to home, if you believe City Manager Ray Gosack and Sebastian County Judge Hudson and their enablers are protecting your rights, you are surely comatose. The above two have been wards of government throughout their adult lives and are instructed via their state & national unions every program they are to institute, sustain, and the mechanisms to be employed.

Citizens, we are in the flypaper.  The omnipresent activities of the power-lusting Democrat & Republican parties, if left to their designs, guarantee the flame of liberty will be extinguished, in this case by Republicans.

The City Street & Sewer Sales Tax vote that would in part subsidize the projected SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Fort Smith Trail System will appear on a ballot in May.

Will it pass? Absolutely! Remember—Bread & Circuses & Ignorance. A textbook example of citizens subsidizing their own demise.

The war for the elimination of our freedoms is in full bloom and Sustainable Development is just one of the multitudes of instruments that are being used to control the masses—BREAD & CIRCUSES.  Juvenal understood despotic government 100 AD, so why can’t citizens understand in 2015?

Government is and has always been the reservoir for despots.

Joe McCutchen

P.S.  There are other significant matters, i.e. the $1/2 billion mandate and the accompanying $300,000 fine issued by the EPA, the anticipated 7-8% pay raises for all city employees, unfunded police & fire pensions, forced water fluoridation, the dysfunctional Convention Center, the proposed Marshal’s Museum, subsidizing downtown property owners, the failed Mitsubishi deal, replete with a plethora of “Bread & Circus” projects—all allegedly short or without funding. Where did the 30 year, $600 million street/sewer tax money go that was earmarked to fix crumbling streets and the dysfunctional sewer system?

IF YOU ARE FEEDING IN THE BREAD & CIRCUS TENT “KEEP YOUR PENNY ROLLING”!

The Muslim Brotherhood in America: The Subversion of National Security

Part 3 of a Series

Mike Scruggs

mikescruggs@morrisbb.net

On February 10, 2011, President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, testified before the House Committee on Intelligence, saying:

“The term ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ is an umbrella term for a variety of movements. In the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried al-Qaeda as a perversion of Islam.  They have pursued social ends, betterment of the political order in Egypt.”

Those who watched his televised testimony and know the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and its sponsorship of the Hamas terrorists in Palestine and their connections to al-Qaeda thought the U.S. intelligence services had suffered from some contagious neural dysfunction.  The next day, longtime U.S. ally, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, was forced out of office for lack of American support. This was despite Israel’s warning that Mubarak’s ouster would lead to Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt. Just as most knowledgeable observers outside of the left-liberal Obama dreamland thought, Israel was right.  Twelve months of Muslim Brotherhood radicalism and tyranny, including severe persecution of Coptic Christians, led to massive public demonstrations. Fortunately, the Egyptian Army was able to restore order and oust Muslim Brother Mohamed Morsi.

This afternoon, Sunday, March 22, 2015, I watched the Fox News interview of CIA Director John Brennan by Chris Wallace.  Brennan constantly parroted the Obama party line that ISIS is not the true Islam, although they operate very close to the philosophy and deeds of the Prophet

as written in their most sacred doctrinal standards, the Koran and supporting “Hadiths.”  The Hadiths are the explanatory traditions and teachings of Muhammad.  The Koran and teachings of Muhammad often exhort the killing of unbelievers, including beheading and burning.  ISIS does seem a bit more psychopathic, but Hamas also kills civilians, sometimes even targeting children for terroristic affect by rockets and suicide bombs that kill, burn, and maim.

According to former Marine officer and anti-terrorist FBI agent, John Guandolo, U.S. CIA Director Brennan actually converted to Islam, while serving in Saudi Arabia, in the 1990s. This is dismissed by liberal media, but Guandolo will not back down on the assertion. Whether or not Brennan is a certified Muslim (all it takes is a verbal confession), Brennan speaks the party line of President Obama that the true Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance. I do not know what zombie drug Clapper and Brennan are on to constantly repeat such counterfactual dogma about the Muslim Brotherhood and Islam. They are remarkably consistent, not only with the beliefs of the President, but also Muslim Brotherhood propaganda strategy.  This propaganda is frequently repeated by left-liberal academics and clueless liberal clergy and media personalities. It is prevalent among Democrat politicians and uncomfortably common among establishment Republicans.

An extremely common public error in the U.S. and Britain is to confuse what individual Muslims believe or practice with what the Koran and the Hadiths say.  Islam cannot be defined by what academics or individual Muslims say or would like to believe about it, but only by what the Koran and the Hadiths say about it.  We must face the unfortunate fact that ISIS, Hamas, and al-Qaeda are quoting and interpreting the Koran and Muhammad in agreement with the original companions and associates of Muhammad.  Similarly, Christianity is not defined by what people, even Christians, say about it. Christianity is defined by what the Bible, says about it.  The Koran and Muhammad are the standards of true Islam, and the Bible and Christ is the standard of true Christianity.

Here is an important distinction: There are many moderate Muslims, but there is

 NO moderate Islam true to the Koran.

Clapper and Brennan are defending a fanciful Islam that does not exist. Again, Islam must follow the Koran, or it is not Islam. Christianity must follow the authority of the Bible, or it is not Christianity. One thing that strikes those knowledgeable about Islam’s history and worldview is how little the chief intelligence officers appointed by Obama know about Islam.  They simply parrot his party line and bury any intelligence that contradicts it. This is an extremely dangerous situation for U.S. national security and public safely.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s chief propaganda front in the U.S. is the Council for American and Islamic Relations (CAIR).  CAIR spokesmen frequently appear on national television and radio networks, including Fox, proclaiming the drum beat that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance or that Islam is a noble religion hijacked by terrorists.  CAIR naturally attacked former FBI agent Guandolo’s assertion that Brennan is a Muslim convert.

Guandolo, however, has impeccable credibility, while CAIR was named by the Dallas U.S. District Attorney as an unindicted conspirator in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation (HLF) Trial. There was overwhelming evidence that HLF funds were being funneled to Hamas terrorists engaged in violent Jihad against Israel and that CAIR, as a major Muslim Brotherhood front, was involved. Again, deception is a major Muslim Brotherhood tool for “civilization Jihad.”   CAIR is extremely well funded by oil money. They can repeat a lie often enough to make it widely believed, especially with a truth-negligent American media, the prevalence of hysterical multiculturalist political correctness, and loads of “dark money” flowing into Democrat and Republican establishment political campaigns.

In addition to Clapper and Brennan, we must remember that the most powerful advisory influence on President Obama is Valerie Jarrett, an Iranian born Muslim with a decidedly radical left-liberal worldview

Most MB subversion and propaganda techniques are strikingly similar to Cold War Communist and New Left methodology. It would be easy to conclude that Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals must be almost as popular as the teachings of Muhammad with MB ideologues. The techniques of leftist “community organization” are also prominent: unremitting claims of victimization, continual escalation of demands, a constant stream of lawsuits (lawfare), and relentless smearing of critics with almost automatic charges racism, bigotry, xenophobia, and Islamophobia.

The American public’s greatest vulnerability to Muslim Brotherhood deception is its declining understanding of Biblical truth, resulting in terribly diminished rational and spiritual discernment of lies and counterfeits. We are left defenseless against ravening wolves.

 

Senate Intelligence Committee Advances Terrible “Cybersecurity ?” Bill: Surveillance Bill in Secret Session

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/03/senate-intelligence-committee-advances.html

Mark Jaycox
Activist Post

The Senate Intelligence Committee advanced a terrible cybersecurity bill called the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 (CISA) to the Senate floor last week. The new chair (and huge fan of transparency) Senator Richard Burr may have set a record as he kept the bill secret until Tuesday night. Unfortunately, the newest Senate Intelligence bill is one of the worst yet.

Cybersecurity bills aim to facilitate information sharing between companies and the government, but their broad immunity clauses for companies, vague definitions, and aggressive spying powers make them secret surveillance bills. CISA marks the fifth time in as many years that Congress has tried to pass “cybersecurity” legislation.

The newest Senate Intelligence bill joins other cybersecurity information sharing legislation like Senator Carper’s Cyber Threat Sharing Act of 2015. All of them are largely redundant. Last year, President Obama signed Executive Order 13636 (EO 13636) directing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to expand current information sharing programs. In February, he signed anotherExecutive Order encouraging regional cybersecurity information sharing and creating yet anotherCyber Threat Center. Despite this, members of Congress like Senators Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr continue to introduce bills that would destroy privacy protections and grant new spying powers to companies.

 

New Countermeasures and Monitoring Powers

Aside from its redundancy, the Senate Intelligence bill grants two new authorities to companies. First, the bill authorizes companies to launch countermeasures (now called “defensive measures” in the bill) for a “cybersecurity purpose” against a “cybersecurity threat.” “Cybersecurity purpose” is so broadly defined that it means almost anything related to protecting (including physically protecting) an information system, which can be a computer or software. The same goes for a “cybersecurity threat,” which includes anything that “may result” in an unauthorized effort to impact the availability of the information system.

Even with the changed language, it’s still unclear what restrictions exist on “defensive measures.” Since the definition of “information system” is inclusive of files and software, can a company that has a file stolen from them launch “defensive measures” against the thief’s computer? What’s worse, the bill may allow such actions as long as they don’t cause “substantial” harm. The bill leaves the term “substantial” undefined. If true, the countermeasures “defensive measures” clause could increasingly encourage computer exfiltration attacks on the Internet—a prospect that may appeal to some “active defense” (aka offensive) cybersecurity companies, but does not favor the everyday user.

Second, the bill adds a new authority for companies to monitor information systems to protect an entity’s hardware or software. Here again, the broad definitions could be used in conjunction with the monitoring clause to spy on users engaged in potentially innocuous activity. Once collected, companies can then share the information, which is also called “cyber threat indicators,” freely with government agencies like the NSA.

Sharing Information with NSA

Such sharing will occur because under this bill, DHS would no longer be the lead agency making decisions about the cybersecurity information received, retained, or shared to companies or within the government. Its new role in the bill mandates DHS send information to agencies—like the NSA—”in real-time.” The bill also allows companies to bypass DHS and share the information immediately with other agencies, like the intelligence agencies, which ensures that DHS’s current privacy protections won’t be applied to the information. The provision is ripe for improper and over-expansive information sharing.

Overbroad Use of Information

Once the information is sent to any government agency (including local law enforcement), it can use the information for reasons other than for cybersecurity purposes. The provisions grant the government far too much leeway in how to use the information for non-cybersecurity purposes. The public won’t even know what information is being collected, shared, or used because the bill will exempt all of it from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

In 2012, the Senate negotiated a much tighter definition in Senator Lieberman’s Cybersecurity Act of 2012. The definition only allowed law enforcement to use information for a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, an imminent threat of death, or a serious threat to a minor. The Senate Intelligence Committee’s bill—at the minimum—should’ve followed the already negotiated language.

Near-Blanket Immunity

The bill also retains near-blanket immunity for companies to monitor information systems and to share the information as long as it’s conducted according to the act. Again, “cybersecurity purpose” rears its overly broad head since a wide range of actions conducted for a cybersecurity purpose are allowed by the bill. The high bar immunizes an incredible amount of activity. Existing private rights of action for violations of the Wiretap Act, Stored Communications Act, and potentially the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act would be precluded or at least sharply restricted by the clause. It remains to be seen why such immunity is needed when just a few months ago, the FTC and DOJ noted they would not prosecute companies for sharing such information. It’s also unclear because we continue to see companies freely share information among each other and with the government both publicly via published reports, information sharing and analysis centers, and private communications.

A Fatally Flawed Bill

This fatally flawed bill must be stopped. It’s not a cybersecurity, but a surveillance bill. And it can be voted on at any time. Get in touch with your Senator, tell them to vote no on the bill, and to not cosponsor the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2014.

Join us now in killing this bill.

Please visit the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where this article first appeared, for the latest news in digital privacy and civil liberties. 

 

Fannie And Freddie Are Headed For Another Bailout

http://investmentresearchdynamics.com/fannie-and-freddie-are-headed-for-another-bailout/

 By Dave Kranzler

Taxpayers pumped over $200 billion in to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after the financial collapse of 2008.   While the Obama Government used taxpayer subsidized loans to move  a large quantities of foreclosed housing inventory from the FNM/FRE and in to big investment funds, FNM/FRE were busy ballooning their mortgage holdings – again.

Now the Inspector General’s Federal Housing Finance Agency has issued a warning that both FNM/FRE are headed for another bailout, which is no surprise to me:

“Future profitability is far from assured,” Federal Housing Finance Agency Office of Inspector General said in a report, pointing out that the firms could again chalk up losses on their derivatives portfolios, similar to those they reported in the fourth quarter. “This increases the likelihood of additional Treasury investment,” the report stated.  –Reuters (LINK)

Similar to when Fannie was plugged full of derivatives under former CEO Franklin Raines – who by the way had no clue how catastrophic the situation was and should be in jail but instead received a $100 million “you’re fired” severance agreement – the Government has once again looked the other way while Wall Street unloaded another avalanche of derivatives onto FNM/FRE.   Once again the Taxpayers will pay for this.

This is not a ‘warning” – this is a “get ready here it comes” statement.   The fact is that most of FNM/FRE’s “profitablity” has been driven by the same fraudulent “mark to model” accounting that has generated most the big bank profits since 2009.

And the Government used this fraudulent accounting to suck money out of FNM/FRE.   The “improved” balance sheet has enabled both FNM/FRE to issue debt to investors.  The money raised has been used reload their mortgage holdings and for dividend “payback” payments to the Treasury.

FNM’s CEO warned of the possibility of another bailout in February, after announcing FNM’s smallest dividend payment to the Treasury in more than four years.  This is not a warning – it’s an inevitability.  The housing market is set to re-collapse, which will blow-up both Fannie and Freddie – once again

******************************************************************************************************

Dear Fellow American,

The #1 financial question I hear from most Americans today is:

Have the problems from 2008 been fixed?

And if not, are we headed for another financial crisis?

Well, the government wants you to believe everything is back to “normal”… that our financial problems have been “fixed” thanks to their bailouts and a few new rules.

But Jim Rickards — who regularly consults with the CIA and the Pentagon, and probably knows more about this subject than anyone — has a very different take.

He says:

“We have a misplaced confidence that central banks can save the day;          in fact, they are ruining our markets.

       “What we are about to experience in the United States will            be the greatest collapse in history — it will be exponentially          larger than any financial panic of the past.”

Please note: Jim Rickards is not an extremist or fear monger, living in an underground bunker somewhere.

Instead, he might actually be the world’s foremost expert on currencies, world economies, and the international banking system.

You see, today, Jim Rickards is not only a financial lawyer and a New York Times best-selling author, he also manages a hedge fund, and serves as an advisor to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence — which oversees the CIA, the NSA, and 14 other U.S. intelligence agencies. He’s been sought out for his currency expertise by: CNBC, Fox, CNN, NPR, theFinancial Times, the New York Times and the Washington Post, just to name a few.

And right now, Jim Rickards says that although few people realize it — we are on the verge of a huge new “currency crisis” in America. In his words…

“If the currency collapses, everything else goes with it… stocks, bonds, commodities, derivatives and other investments are all priced in a nation’s currency. If you destroy the currency, you destroy all markets and the nation.”

In other words, the way you live, work, travel, retire, invest… everything could soon change. Some of it in ways most people would never expect.

If you believe things are “back to normal”… and everything about the U.S. economy and our financial system are OK, Jim Rickards says you should pay attention to a few simple facts, which rarely get reported in the mainstream media:

FACT #1: Jim says the REAL unemployment rate is actually around 23% in America today — if you calculate it the proper way. Most people don’t realize the government’s “official” rate doesn’t count people who have given up, and are no longer seeking work.

FACT #2: Jim Rickards also points out that in six years, from 2008 to 2014, we increased the money supply in the United States from $800 billion to $4 trillion –a whopping 400% increase! But despite all this money printing, individual incomes and household incomes have essentially not increased one bit.

FACT #3: Lots of people say to Jim, if things are so bad, where are the “soup kitchens” like we had in the Great Depression.

Jim Rickards accurately points out that we do indeed have “soup kitchens” today — they just look different than they did 90 years ago. Today’s soup kitchens are places like Safeway, Kroger, Albertsons, WholeFoods, and other grocery stores — because this is where roughly 50 million Americans use government-issued food stamps to eat. Keep in mind: The number of Americans on food stamps has basically doubled since President Obama took office.

FACT #4: Jim Rickards also says the Federal Reserve–which serves as America’s “banker’s bank” and as the government’s bank–is already insolvent. He says they have about $60 billion in cash, but this cash is propping up over $4 trillion in debt, and concludes: “the whole thing is unstable and it’s ready to explode.”

FACT #5: Jim Rickards also says America today is witnessing its third stock bubble, and its second housing bubble, in the past 15 years. These bubbles, according to Jim, do not help the real economy but merely enrich brokers and bankers. And he says when these bubbles burst, the economy will confront a worse panic than occurred in 2008.

Jim Rickards sums it all up this way:

“We are in a depression… It started in 2007 and it is going to continue        indefinitely. Depressions are structural–monetary solutions are                  cyclical. You cannot solve a structural problem with a cyclical remedy-       -monetary policy [printing money] simply will not work.”

So… of course… the big question is… if Jim Rickards is right: When will the next crisis hit, and what can you do about it?

According to Rickards, “Using science, we can’t say very much about the timing, but we can say a lot about the magnitude. This will be the greatest financial collapse in history. I am quite sure about that, but I am not sure about the timing… People think I can call them up at 3 o’clock in the afternoon and tell them tomorrow’s that day, sell your stocks and buy some gold. I can’t do that. I don’t know what day it will be. If we get to that point, it would be too late to act. So, the time to act is now.”

And while Jim Rickards says he isn’t sure exactly when this next crisis will hit, he is fairly confident about how the next crisis will first appear…

“I expect the first phase will appear as a nearly instantaneous 70%               stock market crash. From the outside, nobody will see it coming. Once       it becomes clear that it’s not a flash crash–it’s a systemic meltdown in       the economy itself–that’s when the gravity of the situation will sink in.       And there will be no digging out from it.”

The point of all this, of course, is that if you live in America or own any assets priced in U.S. dollars, this is probably the most important financial topic in the world for you right now.

As Jim says, this is an entirely foreseeable event. It’s happened before and it is happening again now. In his words…

“The international monetary system has already collapsed three times        within the last 100 years–1914, 1939, and 1971–and another collapse          would not be at all unusual. But it’s not the end of the world.

“You just need to understand what will come next, and what the future        international monetary system will look like.”

The point is, even if the crisis is only half as bad as Jim expects, it’s going to have a major, major impact on your life in the next few years.

That’s why I’m urging you to take the necessary steps to protect yourself.

And I firmly believe that the best first step you can take is to read Jim Rickards’ new book on this subject, called The Death of Money.

There are huge potential changes in store for our currency and our financial system–and no book out there even comes close to helping you understand and prepare for these changes.

This book is crucial for EVERY AMERICAN to read as soon as possible. It’s essentially a “playbook” for America’s next–and imminent–financial crisis.

* In fact, I like this book so much, I contacted Jim and his publisher, and arranged a way for you to get a free hardback copy (you’ll pay just $4.95 to cover our costs of shipping and handling).

THE REST IS A SALES PITCH FOR THE Stansberry Research NEWS-LETTER, BUT YOU MAY BE INTERESTED. IF SO, GO HERE AND READ THE REST.

https://orders.cloudsna.com/chain?cid=MKT015300&eid=MKT027799&snaid=&step=start&AID=7236##AST01700

 

 

COMMUNISM, SOCIALISM, TRIBALISM, OLIGARCHY, ELITISM, AND CRONY CAPITALISM

http://newswithviews.com/Barnewall/marilyn207.htm

By Marilyn Barnewall

One of the things white Americans are going to have to come to grips with is that that within 15 years (probably less) our race will be a minority in this country.

I am of an age that I well remember being told in the 1950s that the world was headed for over-population. It would, we were told, result in mass starvation and responsible American families should have no more than two children. The birth rate in white America subsided almost immediately.

Communism, socialism, tribalism, and oligarchies all have one thing in common: Someone else is responsible for your life. From paying for your education, determining what kind of information will be contained in that education/indoctrination, to your career choices, the fuel your car will use (or whether you will be allowed to have a car or be forced to live in cities of six million in population where people are stacked and packed on top of one another that are scattered around the country), who/if you marry, how/if children can be had, at what age medical care will be withdrawn… all (according to Agenda 21) are decisions about you to be made by others.

A large percentage of people who live in nations of the world that subscribe to one of these political philosophies like the idea of having someone else determine what they can and cannot do. They like being relieved of the responsibilities that go with decision making. Every decision we make in life involves risk and a lot of people are uncomfortable with risk management. If they are not the ones making decisions, they feel they won’t be blamed for failure that results from them.

For those of us who think the ultimate glory of life is controlling our own destiny, this is not just a strange human reaction to government power, it is downright insane. It reeks of malignant, evil energy. For Christians, the “it takes a village” mentality totally violates the message of individual responsibility imparted by Jesus Christ, turning His words into group thought with no personal responsibility for individual behavior, no judgments between good and evil because God tells us He will render judgment. If that interpretation of Biblical text was accurate, He would a) not have given us a brain so we can judge what is good and what is evil; b) He would not have provided the Ten Commandments without specific definitions as to what each means (He leaves that to our judgment); and c) we would confess our sins as a group, not individually.

As I look back on those messages of reduced births from the 1950s (my teenage years) and evaluate the misbegotten illegal immigration policies implemented by various government administrations and departments, a pattern emerges.

When one views illegal immigration from a totally neutral position, it is easy to see from actions taken that government has preferences about which illegals they will welcome by ignoring their presence, and which ones they will pursue for being in America illegally. You can say “that’s not true” all you want but the statistics defeat your words. The President’s own words prove my point and his Attorney General’s actions – or lack of them – prove it, too.

Those who cross the Rio Grande River with impunity and receive great rewards for their law breaking have similar traits: 1) They come from tribal cultures where a chieftain of one kind or another has controlled their lives with the same authority royalty once had in old Europe. 2) They are “breeders.” They have far more children than they can afford to feed or educate and depend on the generosity of others to take care of their parental responsibilities which they abrogate (if they recognize such responsibilities exist at all). 3) They are not white. 4) The people who are white and would like to immigrate to America are denied the opportunity and if they enter America illegally they are pursued by law enforcement which ignores illegals from categories 1), 2), and 3).

I do not refer here simply to the financially poor Mexicans who illegally cross our border, but to the Central Americans who do the same. I refer also to Middle Easterners of whom almost all are Muslims (who also have many children). What we saw in Paris during the second week of January 2015 is reflective of the problems being caused everywhere by Muslims who can’t stand the countries in which they live and run away to London or Paris – or Detroit – where they make demands that their adopted government change their country so it is more like the old country they were forced to leave because of despicable living conditions. The message is: “I want all of the advantages that a free enterprise economy produces relative to advancement of civilization without any of the responsibilities that people who live in a free enterprise economy must bear if those advantages are going to be maintained.” Sharia law provides an escape route from decision making because it makes decisions for you in every area of your life.

It can thus be said that those who breed, those to whom being a member of a tribal community comes naturally, and those who are not white are welcomed to our shores. Others are rejected by our immigration policies. I dare anyone reading this who thinks my words are racist or are otherwise slanted to provide meaningful evidence that there is one factual error in my comment. There is not. It is an accurate evaluation of immigration policy in America today.

I mentioned above that tribal cultures are run by authority figures with the same power royalty once had throughout the world. Why do you suppose the influence of royal rule was so dramatically diminished over 200 years ago? Gee, you don’t suppose the establishment of a free nation called the United States of America had anything to do with it, do you? You don’t suppose that the tremendous growth of this new nation – its economic success and stability, offering opportunity for all to prosper without a class system that had outlived its usefulness – had anything to do with it? Of course it did!

Here is my theory which is based on thinking long and hard about the logical outcome of our current immigration policy. It is simple logic.

The white race is the only one that has throughout history resisted long-term slavery of any kind, including tribalism, communism, and socialism. As far back as 1100, citizens of England demanded and got the Charter of Liberties signed by their king because of royal abuses of power over the people of that nation. When that didn’t work, they got the Magna Carta signed. When that did not provide sufficient protection from the royal abuse of power, in 1628 they demanded King Charles sign the Petition of Rights. In 1641 came the Grand Remonstrance and Charles was gone. In 1688 King James was forced to sign the Glorious Resolution which was the English Bill of Rights… it became official in 1689. All of these “Agreements” were demanded by the people because royalty becomes tyrannical and abusive. And then because of the royal abuse of power in 1776 we had the document so meaningful to Americans: The Declaration of Independence.

The white race is the only one that has throughout world history resisted long-term slavery – has been a proponent of the “give me liberty or give me death” philosophy since we began recording history.

Since America’s immigration policies favor admitting only illegal immigrants who consider tribalism not only an accepted but a preferred way of life, it gives rise to a question. Is the reason behind America’s immigration policy – amnesty for illegals – required so tribal types can take from whites their majority status in historically white nations? Does government need to replace whites as the dominant race in these nations so the final plans for a New World Order can be implemented with minimum objection or opposition by whites who resist tribalism, communism and socialism as a form of slavery? One world government cannot be established without America if our standard of living is too high. That standard must be brought down to the level of other nations. Otherwise, other nations will not accept world government because of the perceived preferential treatment of those with a higher standard of living than is available to people of less advanced countries of the world. Why are they less advanced? Because they subscribe to tribalism, socialism, or communism.

The Mexicans and Central Americans who enter our country illegally with the hidden invitation and blessings of government are the poor of those nations. People born in poverty in Mexico and Central America generally descend from Indian bloodlines. Indians, in general, proudly prefer the tribal culture to that of individualism. There’s nothing wrong with that. Whites prefer individualistic social orders – and individualism opposes communism and socialism and oligarchies… forms of government required if there is to be a world government – a New World Order. Tribal cultures not only accept but approve of communism, socialism and oligarchies which are compatible with tribal philosophies. The forms of government from which they all flee throughout the world provide the hard evidence of the truth of my words.

The same is true of Muslims… their history is one of tribal cultures. It is one of the reasons that no matter how hard America tries to nation build in its own image in the Middle East, there will be no individualist free enterprise system of government established with these tribal people. They are tribal to their Muslim souls. All tribal people are. It is not something that can be changed… nor can the individualistic nature of those who seek the opportunity to manage the risks of controlling their own destinies be changed.

If there is fault to be assigned here, it is the arrogant fault of nations who believe they can force an individualist-based system of government on people whose natural inclinations require tribalism.

These needs inside of people to be either an individualist or a tribalist don’t go just an inch or two deep. They run very deep and are not subject to change. They encompass a total social order – which is why Muslims have Sharia law (and want it wherever they re-settle when they leave their homeland behind to seek more opportunity – which, under Sharia, is impossible to achieve).

If we look at the two different cultures, tribalism and individualism, we see that each comes naturally to certain groups of people. Both cultures have positives; both have negatives. Each is needed by the other to achieve at maximum levels of productivity, but because neither understands the other and because each fears the other, our modern culture discourages either group from doing what it was put on earth to do. Each tries to force itself on the other and war always follows such attempts. Instead, both groups need to use their positive strengths to work together.

Individualists are mostly entrepreneurs who consider control of their own destiny the ultimate objective. They are the inventors and business owners of society. In America, they provide employment for 70 percent of the total population. The fact that not all whites are individualists is obvious by merely looking at the tribal mentalities of Progressive Liberals. The fact that not all Muslims or Mexicans or Central Americans are by nature tribal can be seen in independent business ownership.

Each group has a purpose. Entrepreneurial individualists invent things… Steven Jobs who started Apple is a good example of that. His business partner at the beginning, Bill Gates, is a good example of the tribal (or corporate) mentality. I have always believed it was this basic difference between the two that caused the break between them. After the break, Steven Jobs and Apple came close to failure. Gates was brought back into the Apple picture to help solve the problems caused by Jobs’ inability to deal with the large corporate environment that resulted from his successful entrepreneurialism at Apple. The job of creating belongs to the individualist; the job of creating corporate structure – safety and security – belongs to the security-motivated tribal person.

The rogue political elements currently running things worldwide understand this and are taking advantage of overly confident individualists, using their own successes and money to quietly eliminate them. They do so by preying on the security drives of tribalists, giving them as many something for nothing deals money can buy… money wrung out of individualist wallets. They think they’re pretty smart – but haven’t yet come to grips with the fact that innovation does not come from either the elitist or tribalist segments. It comes only from the imaginations of individualists. As I said, both groups are a necessary commodity to a successful social order. If they succeed in eliminating the individualist segment, they will succeed at eliminating innovation and progress.

To come to a reasonable conclusion as to whether a society is tribal or individually dominated, look at the decision-making authority of government in opposition to the people, and look at the court system that supports or doesn’t support it. When one looks at these two things in America today, it can be said that we have become (or are darned close to) a tribal/socialist society. But one must look closely enough to see if tribalism exists because it is what the people want or because the people have the socialist boot of tyranny firmly planted on their necks.

Tribalism will exist in America when freedom-loving whites are no longer the majority population and will be quickly morphed into socialism and then communism (even though the communist system has failed everywhere it has been tried).

Due to the bloody violence used by Muslims who have absolutely no respect for “civilized wars” (if there is such a thing), there is an attitude of disrespect towards Islam and the Muslims who subscribe to it. Who can respect any people whose social barbarism permits the live burial of Christian children? The beheading of innocents? To those Muslims who say Islam is a religion of peace, all I can say is I believe what I see, not what you say. I say the same thing to those who call themselves Christians but who approve of abortion.

The attitude is quite similar to the disrespect and hatred shown towards Jews by the National Socialist (NAZI) Party in Germany prior to World War II. I do not suggest there is a correlative in place that justifies the comparison. The Jews so hated by the Nazis were not beheading people or raping young girls or burying young boys in sand while they were still alive as Muslims do. They didn’t burn a pilot shot down in war while holding him in a cage. The Jews were not barbaric. They were (and are), however, the bankers of the world – the name Rothschild is not the best liked around the world.

I suggest to white people that we understand what is being done to us. The populations of the world are being restructured so those with tribal histories can replace whites in nations throughout the world. It is being done purposefully with the end objective being a New World Order that embodies one world government.

I suggest to you that is the only logical reason for the immigrations policies of Europe (as well as other Continents) and for the illegal alien policies of the United States. We are being replaced to get rid of the “give me liberty or give me death” mentality that goes hand-in-hand with being white (which makes a majority of us individualists) so an oligarchic system of socialism (which always, according to Karl Marx, leads to communism) can be implemented.

[The book: The Coming Battle, published in 1899, documents how the politicians of that period didn’t want the debt to be paid off. They wanted the debt to be rolled over from generation to generation. It continues to this day. It’s a must read.]

 

ALL THREE BRANCHES AGREE BIG BROTHER IS THE NEW NORMAL

http://www.wired.com/2012/10/big-brother-new-normal/

Image: weegeebored/Flickr

By DAVID KRAVETS

DESPITE HURRICANE SANDY, the Supreme Court on Monday entertained oral arguments on whether it should halt a legal challenge to a once-secret warrantless surveillance program targeting Americans’ communications, a program that Congress eventually legalized in 2008.

The hearing marked the first time the Supreme Court has reviewed any case touching on the eavesdropping program that was secretly employed by the President George W. Bush administration in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, and largely codified into law years later.

Just three weeks ago that the Supreme Court closed a six-year-old chapter in the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s bid to hold the nation’s telecoms liable for allegedly providing the National Security Agency with backdoors to eavesdrop, without warrants, on Americans’ electronic communications in violation of federal law. The justices, without comment, declined to review a lower court’s December decision dismissing the EFF’s lawsuit. At the center of the dispute was legislation retroactively immunizing the telcos from being sued for cooperating with the government in Bush’s warrantless spy program.

Fast forward to Monday, and the court took the historic step of hearing a post-September 11 spying case. Judging by the high court’s deference to Congress in general and how it killed the EFF spy case weeks ago, we likely already know the outcome of this highly complex issue now before the justices: Warrantless spying is expected to continue unabated for years, and possibly forever.

University of Baltimore legal scholar Garrett Epps in a Sunday blog post in the Atlantic asked in a headline whether “Big Brother is the New Normal?” His own affirmative answer is spot-on:

“Whatever the court decides, Big Brother will still be watching. Big Brother may be watching you right now, and you may never know,” he said. “Since 9/11, our national life has changed forever. Surveillance is the new normal.”

Let’s start with summarizing the legal issue before that Supreme Court.

The same law that immunized the telcos is before the justices. This time, however, another section of the FISA Amendments Act (.pdf) is at issue. The act, subject to a challenge by the American Civil Liberties Union and others, authorizes the government to electronically eavesdrop on Americans’ phone calls and e-mails without a probable-cause warrant so long as one of the parties to the communication is believed to be outside the United States. Communications may be intercepted “to acquire foreign intelligence information.”

There’s more.

The FISA Amendments Act generally requires the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court, a secret tribunal set up in the wake of President Richard M. Nixon-era eavesdropping, to rubber-stamp terror-related electronic surveillance requests. The government does not have to identify the target or facility to be monitored. It can begin surveillance a week before making the request, and the surveillance can continue during the appeals process if, in a rare case, the secret FISA court rejects the surveillance application.

Yet none of these details are even before the Supreme Court.

Instead, the fight is about something much simpler.

The Obama administration argues that the ACLU and a host of other groups don’t have the legal standing to even bring a challenge.

A lower court agreed, ruling the ACLU, Amnesty International, Global Fund for Women, Global Rights, Human Rights Watch, International Criminal Defense Attorneys Association, The Nation magazine, PEN American Center, Service Employees International Union and other plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the case because they could not demonstrate that they were subject to the eavesdropping.

The groups appealed to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that they often work with overseas dissidents who might be targets of the National Security Agency program. Instead of speaking with those people on the phone or through e-mails, the groups asserted that they have had to make expensive overseas trips in a bid to maintain attorney-client confidentiality. The plaintiffs, some of them journalists, also claim the 2008 legislation chills their speech, and violates their Fourth Amendment privacy rights.

Without ruling on the merits of the case, the appeals court agreed with the plaintiffs last year that they have ample reason to fear the surveillance program, and thus have legal standing to pursue their claim.

That’s it.

That’s what this case before the justices is all about, whether a lawsuit can be brought at all. The courts are years away, if ever, of entertaining the constitutional merits of the law in question. So the spying will continue unabated no matter how the Supreme Court decides Monday’s arguments.

The government’s argument can be reduced to this scary proposition: You can’t sue us for secretly spying on you because there’s no way for you to prove it. Case closed.

Now the thing is, the spying law expires at the end of the year, if Congress fails to re-authorize it.

But that’s not going to happen.

“It’s conventional wisdom that they are going to re-authorize,” Alex Abdo, an ACLU attorney who was before the justices Monday, said in a telephone interview.

Sure, Obama promised in 2008 to add oversight and privacy protections when he ostensibly held his nose and voted for telecom immunity as an Illinois senator.

But now re-authorization, without any call for amendment, is the Obama administration’s “top priority.” The House and a Senate committee (.pdf) have approved competing bills that renew the spy powers for between 3 and 5 years.

But on the Senate side, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) has stepped in to stop the bill because the government refuses to say how often the spy powers are being used to spy on Americans. Wyden asked the Obama administration a year ago for that information.

The administration replied that it was “not reasonably possible to identify the number of people located in the United States whose communications may have been reviewed under the authority of the FAA.”

Wyden has barred the Senate from a routine vote using a little-used legislative power — called a hold — to block lawmakers from taking a procedural consent vote. Instead, he demands a floor debate that can draw out the approval process indefinitely via the filibuster.

But not even Wyden’s opposition will prevent renewal of the legislation.

A Wyden spokeswoman has said the senator would be willing to agree to a “short term” extension of the measure, instead of seeing the spy powers lapse, in a bid to give lawmakers more time to reach a deal.

So there you have it, the biggest opponent of the law is willing to reauthorize it rather than see it sunset.

Now, back to Monday’s case before the Supreme Court.

Even if the justices side with the ACLU, that does not necessarily mean the constitutionality of the FISA Amendments Act would be litigated — ever.

The lawsuit would return to New York federal court, where the Obama administration likely would play its trump card: an assertion of the powerful state secrets privilege that lets the executive branch effectively kill lawsuits by claiming they threaten to expose national security secrets.

The courts tend to defer to such claims. But in a rare exception in 2008, a San Francisco federal judge refused to throw out a wiretapping lawsuit against AT&T under the state secrets privilege. The AT&T lawsuit was later killed anyway. As I mentioned earlier, the FISA Amendments Act also granted the phone companies retroactive legal immunity for their alleged participation in the NSA spying program.

Indeed. Big Brother is the new normal. The government got caught secretly and illegally turning its powerful spy agency on its own citizens — and we let them then enshrine it into a law that can’t be challenged in court.

Don’t take my word, just ask two American attorneys for an Islamic group called Al-Haramain. The government accidentally sent them proof they’d been spied on — it was ruled inadmissible. They then proved using open source info that the government spied on them without warrants, and won a small amount of money and lawyers fees. An appeals court then tossed that verdict, saying that the wiretapping law as designed by Congress doesn’t actually let citizens sue the government for damages for violating the law.

The game is rigged, the network is bugged, the government talks double-speak, the courts are complicit and there’s nothing you can do about it.

 

Supreme Court Rules that Cops DO NOT Need a Warrant to Search Your Home

http://thejacksonpress.org/?p=31203

 By Matt Agorist  / The Free Thought Project

In another devastating blow to freedom, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that police don’t need a warrant to search your property. As long as two occupants disagree about allowing officers to enter, and the resident who refuses access is then arrested, police may enter the residence.

“Instead of adhering to the warrant requirement,” Ginsburg wrote, “today’s decision tells the police they may dodge it, never mind ample time to secure the approval of a neutral magistrate.” Tuesday’s ruling, she added, “shrinks to petite size our holding in Georgia v. Randolph.”

Georgia v. Randolph was a similar case the Supreme Court addressed in 2006, in which a domestic violence suspect would not allow police to enter his home, though his wife did offer police consent. The police ultimately entered the home. The Court ruled in the case that the man’s refusal while being present in the home should have kept authorities from entering.

“A physically present inhabitant’s express refusal of consent to a police search [of his home] is dispositive as to him, regardless of the consent of a fellow occupant,” the majority ruled in that case.

The majority, led by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., said police need not take the time to get a magistrate’s approval before entering a home in such cases. But dissenters, led by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, warned that the decision would erode protections against warrantless home searches. The court had previously held that such protections were at the “very core” of the 4th Amendment and its ban on unreasonable searches and seizures, reports the LA Times.

According to the AP, Justice Samuel Alito wrote the court’s 6-3 decision holding that an occupant may not object to a search when he is not at home.

We therefore hold that an occupant who is absent due to a lawful detention or arrest stands in the same shoes as an occupant who is absent for any other reason,” Alito said.

In other words, you have no property rights slave, and we can snoop through your personal belongings if we wish.

The implications for such a Stasi-esque interpretation of the 4th Amendment are staggering. This can and will open the door to even more unscrupulous police behavior. They will only need to say that someone may be in danger, and now they are justified in ransacking your home.

While this doesn’t particularly allow for police to choose and enter any home they wish, it is nothing to be downplayed, especially since Justice Ginsburg, one of their own, even stated that this could lead to even more erosion of what is left of the 4th Amendment.

 

Hollywood War Films, An Instrument of Military Indoctrination: The “American Sniper” Reviewers’ Consensus

http://www.globalresearch.ca/hollywood-war-films-an-instrument-of-military-indoctrination-the-american-sniper-reviewers-consensus/5436277

By Dr. T. P. Wilkinson

Global Research,

Since American Sniper has become one of the “top grossing films of all time”, garnering a few Academy Award nominations and at least one, if trivial, award, there have been even more reviews written about this insidious and insipid strip of celluloid. Unsurprisingly all of them contain the same swill. I had to return to my own review just to see if I had perhaps omitted anything essential or if anyone might have thought in an at least similar direction.

The defensive focus of vocal support for the film is equally and unsurprisingly the condition of “veterans”. In fact this is probably the single most abused excuse for US war film production since the US regime withdrew its uniformed forces from Vietnam. To be fair, although by no means generous, some of the reviewers suggested that critical attention be focused on those who initiate and manage the wars that create such neglected veterans. As I have argued elsewhere, this is still the “wrong war thesis” and remains a kind of apology for the centuries of carnage wrought by the regime in Washington.

On the other side of the phony political divide are those who claim that Mr. Eastwood does not present the humanity of Iraqis fairly. Of course this begs the question as to why, if Americans were concerned about Iraqi humanity, they would derive such satisfaction from destroying Iraq and maiming or murdering millions of its inhabitants, while plundering and pillaging the country for nearly fifteen years? The fact that the film has generated such high gross receipts is certainly proof that Americans are not at all concerned with the humanity of Iraqis (or anyone else for that matter) but enjoy war and murder as entertainment.

I recently had a long discussion with a good acquaintance whose daughter is engaged to a professional soldier in the German army. I asked him if he (a pacifist) and his daughter were conscious of what this could mean in even the very near future. He said his relationship to his daughter although good, despite the divorce between him and the girl’s mother was still tenuous– or he perceived it as such. In other words, he did not want to risk breaking the contact to his daughter by pointing out that she intended to marry a professional killer. He retorted that she was aware of the risks involved for a soldier and that this did not diminish her love for the man. I acknowledged that although a 20-something woman is an adult and has her own responsibilities, she could hardly (at least in Germany) be expected to be fully aware of the immediate consequences of marriage to a professional soldier. The conversation revolved around whether one could or could not, as a German soldier, be ordered to kill people. Here it is worth mentioning that when the German government prepared to end universal conscription the airwaves were saturated with McCann Erickson advertising for the German Army, exactly modeled on the US Army’s “be all you can be” campaign from the 1970s and 1980s. Germany was being prepared for integration in the post-Vietnam US killing industry.

Quite aside from the absurdity of debating killing in the military, the issues of obedience and camaraderie as well as patriotic loyalty were raised. His future son-in-law would not intend to kill except to protect his comrades. Moreover the young man was convinced that the German Army defends the values of the old “citizen army” under universal conscription. I said that someone who believes that the German army (even under conscription) was a democratic defense institution is either stupid or crassly ignorant or worse mendacious– since especially in Germany the remilitarization was forced on the population by the US, by its stooge Conrad Adenauer using parliamentary tricks and police to suppress general– even legislative– opposition to rearmament after WWII. Never mind that more than a few I know who served in the subscription army could recite stories about the vitality of the Wehrmacht tradition in the garrisons even in the 1980s.

Then I asked if there was any sense in a pacifist attitude when one is not even willing to confront one’s own children with the consequences of marrying professional killers or accepting their profession as “just another job”. If one has no great social influence as a pacifist, one might think that at least defense of one’s own family against the trauma and the criminal collusion with the war machine would be a kind of duty. Doesn’t it make sense to protect the physical and mental health of one’s family by discouraging participation in the war machine wherever possible?

The answer given in the American Sniper genre is that even mass murderers need love and understanding. However such love is never the much-trumpeted “tough” kind that says to a partner: “I do not believe love and murder are compatible, you have to make a choice!” Americans are told every day how “tough” their love has to be, as if “tough” equals honest. In practice “tough” love has nothing to do with love, it is all about being “tough” e.g. neglecting the poor and slaughtering non-whites for fun and conquest.

Military indoctrination also has its impact in the “white branches” even if it is by no means as obvious as in the case of infantrymen. Both the Navy and the Air Force are largely white preserves and their members generally kill from a distance or remotely, at limited risk to their own lives. Much of the military apparatus is clothed in suits rather than uniforms and if white (and middle class) operates by remote control. The pleasure of vigilante films like American Sniper derives from the self-pity cultivated among the poor who kill directly and the vanity of the technologically indoctrinated iPhone classes. Killing Iraqis (or other non-whites) is either a game of supremacy or an exercise in consumer sadism. However, among the covert, and hence chronically unnamed entrepreneurs and managers of these wars, it is both.

When a train hits a person who either accidentally or deliberately falls in front of it, the locomotive driver (at least in Germany) is relieved of duty immediately and given psychological/ psychiatric support to overcome the shock. New Year’s Day this year it took me 12 hours to get to Berlin because someone jumped in front of our train between Hamburg and Berlin. This is how seriously an accident is treated,  although jumping in front of trains is no new or particularly rare event. (Imagine if every soldier had to be treated in the same way due to “accidental” defensive discharge of his firearm!) Everyone on the train was full of sympathy (or pretended so) for the poor driver who had to experience driving over a single human being. The same people have no serious problem when it comes to tank drivers crushing women and children in Afghanistan or Iraq or in any unnamed African country. I suggested that locomotive engineers simply be paid “hazardous duty” bonuses like soldiers: everyone was horrified.

But aren’t those women and children simply “suicides”? Their lives are defined by living in the path of merely occasional tank drivers who cannot be expected to stop their line of travel any more than a locomotive engineer surprised by a falling body.

In fact all these reviews support the thesis that it is the fault of Iraqis or other non-whites that they are in the way of routine American train movement. Chris Kyle was just one of those lonely locomotive engineers who ultimately needed treatment for the trauma of driving over too many suicides (those who have the misfortune to live on the same route where the US builds its global railroad tracks). Of course if Americans took the history of their own railroads seriously, they were not only metaphors for conquest. The “iron horse” rolled over the Chinese, African-Americans, and Native Americans, enriching the white elite that still rules the American empire. It was the natural extension of the cavalry and later mechanized infantry that terrorize the world today. The reviewers of American Sniper all accept the tank, APC, and Humvee as public transportation and their drivers as the engineers and conductors. They and the mass public for Mr. Eastwood’s film have all willingly paid their fare on the Great Death Railway run by the US Empire. All aboard!

Copyright © 2015 Global Research

 OLDDOGS COMMENTS

While I applaud Dr. Wilkinson’s compassion for the millions of victims of our Nation’s history, war is sometimes justified, and in this case it would be us against the International Banking Cartel who has manipulated billions of people into accepting war as entertainment and profit. As atrocious as war and the killer attitude among men is, I would never support a total pacifist ideology. In fact, I would deliriously participate in the most gruesome torture of the Bankers and their government stooges. They have collectively converted patriotism into the unspeakable. BTW WATCH THIS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs7mcSYCWWM

BREAKING!

Billionaire Eric Sprott Just Made The Most Terrifying Prediction Of 2015

http://kingworldnews.com/billionaire-eric-sprott-just-made-the-most-terrifying-prediction-of-2015/

March 13, 2015

Today billionaire Eric Sprott warned King World News that the entire global financial system is now facing the greatest danger in history.  He then issued the most dire prediction of 2015.

Eric King:  “We had (the stock market collapse) of 2001 – 2003.  Then we had (the more intense collapse of) 2007, 2008, 2009.  The next one (collapse) is going to be worse because that’s just how these cycles progress.  As you know, they (seizures in the global financial system) get more violent and the collapses become more and more intense.  People couldn’t imagine it would get worse than 2001 – 2003, and yet we had 2007 – 2009.  This one that’s in front of us, I’m assuming it’s going to be the mother of all collapses.”

Billionaire Eric Sprott (pictured below) Warns A Global Financial Wipeout Is Coming

Eric Sprott:  “Two words that come to my mind, Eric, ‘No bid.’  In other words, if you take the central planners out of the market, there is no bid….

Continue reading the Eric Sprott interview below…

It’s So Preposterous

“So who’s going to buy it?  Who in their right mind would be buying bonds with a negative yield?  It’s just so preposterous. And all of the sudden if the bond buyer is not there — we used to think it was so great that China would buy our bonds.  They don’t buy our bonds (anymore).  Russia used to buy our bonds — they (now) sell our bonds.

No Bid Means Collapse

The only entities buying the bonds are the central banks.  Well, you take the central bank out of it and there’s no bid.  That’s why I use the phrase, ‘I hope we are not right one day,’ that all of the sudden it (the entire global financial system) just collapses.

 Game Over

They (central banks) may just look in the cupboard and say, ‘It’s over.  We’ve tried our best and it’s not working.  We’ve got to stop buying these bonds because our (central bank) balance sheets are getting so torqued out.’

It Will Have To Stop

The Debt/GDP numbers are getting so egregious that at some point they will have to stop.  It’s a lot like when Greece finally came out and said, ‘We’re a bankrupt state.’  Well, yes, we knew you were a bankrupt state and finally somebody admitted it and he won’t be the last guy either.  (Laughter).

 More Bankrupt Countries

There will be lots of those coming along because every country has done the same thing: increase the debt, GDP goes down and tax revenue goes down — ‘Hey, I can’t pay you back.’  That’s the definition of bankruptcy — ‘I can’t pay you back.’  Just like the U.S. government is not going to be able to honor their promises!

 Central Banks Controlling Markets

When are they (the U.S. government) finally going to say they can’t pay you back?  I don’t know when that’s going to happen but I can be as patient as Janet Yellen can.  I don’t know when that day comes, Eric, but we see signs of it everyday.  And we keep wondering how the market holds itself together?  I’m sure the central planners are involved.

If it was up to me to try to keep the market up, I would put an order in to buy the S&P futures for $100 million or $1 billion, or whatever the number is, send it down the slowest pipe I can — everybody front-runs me and the market miraculously goes up because of all the high-frequency traders (HFTs) trying to beat me to the punch.

 Look Out Below!

It’s funny how things have evolved the way they have.  I was reading recently that some former SEC Commissioner was saying, ‘The system is so screwed up.’  And of course he talked about liquidity:  ‘These markets don’t have a lot of liquidity.  If you take the big buyer away, wow, look out below!’”

Eric Sprott’s remarkable audio interview will be released later today! To listen when it’s available CLICK HERE. The written interview only contains 5 percent of what is in his outstanding audio interview. Sprott discusses global financial collapse, the most dire prediction of 2015, the gold and silver takedown, what surprises to expect this year and much more.

***ALSO JUST RELEASED: Here Are Two Of The Most Unprecedented, All-Time Record Market Distortions In History CLICK HERE.

© 2015 by King World News®. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.  However, linking directly to the blog page is permitted and encouraged.

 

One Last Look At The Real Economy Before It Implodes Part 2

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/2534-one-last-look-at-the-real-economy-before-it-implodes-part-2

By Brandon Smith

Consumer spending in the U.S. accounts for approximately 70 percent of gross domestic product, though it is important to note that the manner in which “official” GDP is calculated is highly inaccurate. For example, all government money used within the Medicare coverage system to pay for “consumer health demands,” as well as the now flailing Obamacare socialized welfare program, are counted toward GDP, despite the fact that such capital is created from thin air by the Federal Reserve and also generates debt for the average taxpayer. Government debt creation does not beget successful domestic production. If that was a reality, then all socialist and communist countries (same thing) would be wildly enriched today. This is simply not the case.

That said, the swift decline in manufacturing jobs in the U.S. over the past two decades, including a considerable 33 percent overall decline in manufacturing jobs from 2001 to 2010, leaves only the consumer and service sectors as the primary areas of employment and “production.” The service sector provides about three out of every four jobs available in America, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The truth is that America actually produces very little that is tangible beyond Big Macs, pharmaceuticals and the occasional overpriced fighter jet that doesn’t function correctly and is filled with Chinese parts. All three will kill you at varying degrees of speed…

In the first part of this article series, I discussed the true state of global demand, along with the unstable situation within numerous indicators from exports to retail. Swiftly falling global demand for raw materials as well as consumer goods is an undeniable reality. This is a distinct problem in terms of the U.S., which has been, up until recently, the primary consumption driver for much of the world. As I plan to show, U.S. demand is about to fall even further into the abyss as real unemployment and personal debt take their toll.

Now, it is probably important to address the lies presented in the mainstream and by the BLS in terms of unemployment statistics because even after years of alternative analysts debunking establishment stats and how they are calculated, we STILL end up hearing the same arguments parroted by disinformation agents and unwitting useful idiots.

Such people continue to parade around boasting about the latest BLS reports on job creation claiming that “all is well” because the unemployment rate has dropped to 5.5% and all other talk to the contrary is “doom and gloom.” So, once again, I must relate the fact that the current BLS numbers are an utter sham.

Official unemployment stats are arrived at through disingenuous methods of calculation that were introduced in the 1990s, just before the bursting of the dot com bubble; the introduction of artificially low interest rates, which created the derivatives crisis; and the steady derailment of the U.S. financial system, which has occurred ever since.

So who is actually counted as employed and who is NOT counted as employed by the BLS?

Of the 102 million working-age Americans without work today, only 8.7 million are counted by the BLS as unemployed. Out of all working-age Americans, over 92 million are without jobs and are not counted by the BLS as unemployed. Why?

Well, if you ever read establishment-leaning propaganda websites like Factcheck or Poltifact, the argument is essentially that these 92 million Americans are not counted because they “refuse to participate,” not because they can’t find adequate employment and not because the government is misrepresenting the numbers. Yes, that’s right, 92 million Americans don’t count because they clearly must not want work.

So, first, I would ask how it is that the BLS comes to the conclusion that nearly one-third of the U.S. population does not want to work? Is it through its so called “household surveys?” Surveys, just like public polls, can be easily manipulated to affirm any particular bias merely by changing how questions are phrased. I would certainly love to see the raw data from such polls before the BLS adds its own spin.

Second, even if such claims were true and tens of millions of Americans did not want to work, why would this matter? Shouldn’t they still be counted as unemployed in order to draw the most accurate picture of our economic situation? Wouldn’t 92 million Americans apparently on a long-term labor and productivity strike have a severe negative effect on real GDP? And obviously, they must be surviving somehow. Wouldn’t 92 million people eventually require government assistance through food stamps and welfare? Does none of this matter to the BLS in terms of the overall economic picture?

Third, if the assertion is that 92 million people do not want jobs, then by extension the BLS would have to show that those millions of people could in fact get a job if they simply tried. Where are these tens of millions of jobs that Americans are refusing to apply for and what do they pay?

Fourth, a common misrepresentation attached to the claim of “refusal to participate” is that many of these Americans are teens in school (16 to 18) and possible “retirees” (55 or older). The BLS and the mainstream media simply assume these people do not want a job and should not be counted as unemployed. Of course, the BLS includes such people in its stats when they DO have jobs. So, according to the BLS, if you are 16 or 55 or 65 and you have a job, then you count. If you are 16 or 55 or 65 and don’t have a job, then you don’t count. See how that works?

Fifth, millions of Americans are losing long-term unemployment benefits every quarter and are being removed from BLS statistics. Many of them are not teens or retirees. These are average-working-age adults who now no longer have any real launch pad to progress in their career or life, and who should be fully motivated to obtain work if jobs are so readily available. Again, where are these jobs that said prime-working-age people refuse to accept?

The BLS also invariably discounts the number of working-age Americans who enter the market as well when boasting of jobs created to the public. Job growth numbers do not weigh the number of new participants each month with the number of supposed jobs made available, thus creating a misconception about how many new jobs are actually needed to keep the economy functional.

Another important factor to observe in government labor statistics is the issue of part-time work. When the BLS releases its monthly stats on unemployment, it does not widely promote or discuss the fact that 18 percent to 20 percent of those labeled “employed” are considered “part-time employed.” The BLS defines “part-time employed” as anyone who works 1 to 34 hours per week. Yes, if you work one hour per week, you have helped to bring down the overall unemployment rate of the U.S. to a fantastic 5.5 percent, even though you likely have zero ability to support yourself financially, let alone a family.

What does the 5.5 percent unemployment number actually represent on a fundamental level where the real world actually matters rather than the world of hypothetical calculations? Not a damn thing. The number is absolutely and unequivocally meaningless.

If one were to calculate unemployment using pre-1990s methods, as websites likeShadowstats.com do, counting U-6 measurements as well as the underemployed, you would come up with a U.S. jobless rate closer to 23 percent.

Many of those workers in the service sector on the higher end of the part-time and full-timespectrum still cannot support themselves adequately due to falling wages, rising prices and growing debt obligations, which brings me to the next problem at hand.

Beyond unemployment as a destroyer of consumer demand, there is also personal debt. Much of the focus within the mainstream and even alternative economics revolves around national debt (I will cover the many lies surrounding national debt in my next article). However, effects on fundamental demand are far clearer when one examines household liabilities. According to averages supplied through government stats (meaning the real numbers are likely far worse), the average American household suffers from between $10,000 to $15,000 in credit card debt, $155,000 in mortgage debt and $32,000 in student loan debt.

Americans owed nearly $12 trillion overall in 2014, an increase of 3.3 percent over 2013. Declines in some debts, including a decline in credit card debts since 2011, are attributed to numerous defaults, not repayments.

What we have here is a deadly fiscal combination; namely the combination of real unemployment at permanently high levels and real personal debt at unsustainable levels. This is the core reason behind the collapse in global demand that was discussed in the first installment of this series. With U.S. consumers no longer able to support their historical consumption habits and with the inflexible skeleton of the U.S. economy in particular dependent on past consumer dynamics, the system has little financial plasma left circulating.

This is not necessarily a new trend; but 10 years ago, Americans were able to offset their dwindling buying power by taking on massive debts through easy Federal Reserve fiat fueling questionable bank loans. They no longer have this option; thus, consumption is going to degrade (and is degrading) to the point that the current financial structure, stuck in its rigid and fragile dynamic, will collapse. There is no way around it.

As stated in my last article, the numbers given here are in most cases establishment-generated statistics. A common argument among state apologists and propagandists is that we in the alternative economic field should be labeled “hypocritical” if we debunk some mainstream stats while using others as reference points. I would make clear yet again that it is the contradictionswithin the government’s own numbers and claims that alternative analysts are most concerned with. My view is that when mainstream numbers actually reflect negative economic trends, they should be multiplied according to other prominent factors. That is to say, when the government bureaucrats and fantasy masters finally admit things are bad, they are actually much worse than indicated.

Some mainstream statistics are outright fraudulent; some are half true; others are factual yet hidden in plain site from the general public. In between the lines of all of this information, good and bad, alternative economists attempt to discern as much foundational truth as possible. As this series continues, I believe readers new to the Liberty Movement, as well as longtime activists, will come to view a wider and fuller picture of our fiscal situation and come to the same conclusion I have – That the manner in which we live today is about to drastically change, and that this coming change is being hidden from us deliberately by those who wish to use a tactic of financial shock and awe to their ultimate advantage.

If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here.  We greatly appreciate your patronage.

You can contact Brandon Smith at:

brandon@alt-market.com

 

Overwhelming Control Mechanisms Life in the USA

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/03/overwhelming-control-mechanisms-life-in.html

Catherine J. Frompovich   Source
Activist Post

The information at the beginning of this article and within the break is NOT my work. It is the excellent research and work of Amy Worthington published at Global Research, June 1, 2004. However, I received permission to copy and paste from GR’s editor what I feel infers control mechanisms in Worthington’s most revealing article, “Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War,” copyright 2004 by Amy Worthington. Whatever is in italics within Amy’s article is Catherine’s emphasis being added.

In The Report from Iron Mountain published in 1967, just as the Pentagon’s lucrative Vietnam War was being revved into high gear, establishment braintrusters confirmed that perpetual war is absolutely vital for controlling and manipulating the masses. The document even suggested a number of options for creating fictitious enemies, noting that perpetual war induces populations to give blind allegiance to political authority.52 [1]

[Question: Haven’t the world’s populations lived in a state of almost ‘perpetual war’ since shortly after WWII ended in 1945? The Korean War lasted from June 25, 1950 to July 27, 1953.]

Since the 1930s, when the Eastern Establishment, including the Bush family, used its New York banks and oil companies to secretly fund Hitler’s German Nazi party,53 [2] our controllers have employed FEAR, the concept of ENEMY and WAR to keep us in bondage. Chemtrailing is a manifestation of the Fourth Reich, an era of corporate fascism ushered in by a powerful military juggernaut, which manufactures enemies and unleashes fake terror attacks to scare us into voiceless submission. 

[Question: Isn’t that what the Hegelian Dialectic submits: problem, reaction, solution?]

Both Saddam Hussein and the al Queda networks have long been nourished with U.S. government and corporate funding and groomed by U.S. military and corporate advisors to play useful roles as “enemies.”54 Former German Technology Minister Andreas von Bulow recently confirmed on U.S. radio that hijacked planes were able to fly around the eastern U.S. on 9/11 unimpeded by military interdiction because those attacks were part of a carefully-orchestrated “covert operation” designed to coerce America into perpetual conflict with the Muslim world.55 [3]
[Since 1980, the USA has bombed or occupied 14 Muslim world countries. “Let’s tick them off: Iran (1980, 1987-1988), Libya (1981, 1986, 1989, 2011), Lebanon (1983), Kuwait (1991), Iraq (1991-2011, 2014-), Somalia (1992-1993, 2007-), Bosnia (1995), Saudi Arabia (1991, 1996), Afghanistan (1998, 2001-), Sudan (1998), Kosovo (1999), Yemen (2000, 2002-), Pakistan (2004-) and now Syria.”(Source) Oct. 3, 2014]

Now [2004?], a “secret” Pentagon report has been conveniently leaked to the media. Itcontends that abrupt climate change is the most fearful hobgoblin yet.56 [4] Authored by change agents with ties to the CIA and the Royal Dutch/Shell Group, the report contends that abrupt climate change will lead to a global catastrophe of monumental proportions, including nuclear war and natural disasters, as whole nations disappear beneath the encroaching sea and survivors fight for dwindling food, water and energy supplies.

Yet the Pentagon has been involved for decades in the drastic manipulation of weather, climate and atmospheric conditions. The U.S. used a chemical agent dubbed Olive Oil during Operation Popeye to induce heavy rains in Vietnam 40 years ago.57 [5] The Air Force document titled “Weather As a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025” lists its weaponized agenda for creating abrupt climate change including: Storm creation and modification, fog and cloud creation, precipitation enhancement, precipitation denial, drought inducement and artificial creation of “space weather.” This document also states that the military’s radical weather modification agenda will “become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications.”58 [6]

[Question: Were other sovereign countries of the world queried or asked permission to reprogram their respective weather patterns by the U.S. Air Force/Navy, government agencies, or its private contractors?]

Weather weapons are now routinely used in war zones. A citizen reporting from Serbia noted that during NATO operations in the Balkans, black clouds suddenly materialized out of blue skies, hailstones were the size of eggs, and surreal thunder and lightening [sic] terrified the people. He reported that scientists found that the electromagnetic field over Serbia had been punctured, causing rain systems to circumvent the region.59 [7] In addition to manufactured drought, scientists also predict that Serbia will suffer 10,000 cancer deaths from DU weaponry used there.60 [8]

[Question: Is that what’s happening to California weather for the past four years?]

According to University of Ottawa Professor Michael Chossudovsky, the military’s High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), operating in Alaska as part of the Strategic Defense Initiative, is a powerful tool for weather and climate modification.61 [9] Operated jointly by the U.S. Navy and Air Force, HAARP antennas bombard and heat the ionosphere, causing electromagnetic frequencies to bounce back to earth, penetrating everything living and dead.62 [10]

HAARP transmissions make holes in the ozone,63 [11] creating yet another hobgoblin. HAARP inventor Bernard Eastlund described in his original patent how antenna energy can interact with plumes of atmospheric particles, used as a lens or focusing device, to modify weather.64 [12]HAARP is capable of triggering floods, droughts and hurricanes, much to the chagrin of both the European Parliament and the Russian Duma.65 [13]

[Question: Is there any wonder that the USA is often viewed as an “aggressor nation” by foreign people and other countries?]

HAARP also generates sweeping pulses through the ULF/ELF range.66 [14] In 2000, independent researchers monitored HAARP transmissions of 14 hertz. They found that when these signals were broadcast at high output levels, wind speeds topped 70 miles per hour. They watched as these same transmissions dispersed a huge weather front approaching the west coast from California to British Columbia. Although precipitation had been originally forecast, the front was seen shredding apart on satellite photos and rain did not materialize.67 [15] The hobgoblin drought can be an enriching and empowering tool for certain corporate and governing entities. 

[Question: Again, is that what’s happening to California’s weather?]

HAARP is not only capable of destabilizing agricultural and ecological systems anywhere on the planet, but its effects can target select regions to affect human physical, mental and emotional responses during non-lethal warfare projects.68 [16] HAARP frequencies beamed at specific targets can generate catastrophic earthquakes,69 [17] exactly like the quake last December which killed thousands of people in Iran, a nemesis nation according to the Bush administration.

[Note: Up to 50,000 people may have died! (Source)]

The Pentagon’s warning about climate catastrophe is surely nothing more than a thinly-veiled attempt to prepare the masses for the bizarre atmospheric upheavals we can expect as the military continues to brutalize our planet and near space with its grotesque toys. And we ain’t seen nothing yet. Dr. Eastlund and his ilk have developed plans for solar power satellites designed to modify the weather with electromagnetic beam output that dwarfs the present HAARP system.70 [18] As abrupt climate change is increasingly orchestrated, we will surely need additional fascist agencies, an ever-growing military budget and more poison-particle projects that just happen to ensure population reduction as a side benefit.

[Question: Are all those frightening and weird booming/trumpeting sounds heard globally, plus other unusual sky phenomena, attributable to solar power satellites possibly malfunctioning, or is there a real ‘star wars’ going on in the planet’s atmosphere?]

Source

Despite visual evidence that every aspect of our physical environment is being manipulated and damaged for war games, some Americans cannot accept that dangerous covert operations are being conducted by a government they still believe to be a virtuous defender of freedom. Their stumbling block is a numbing belief that their own officials would never perpetrate dangerous experimentation on humanity since “they have families too.” History and the release of declassified government documents disprove such naiveté. 

The U.S. government also conducted over 4,000 radiation experiments on individual human test subjects without their informed consent.75 [19]

As military tankers spew white chemical plumes across America at a cost of $3,448 per hour per tanker,77 [20] we are reminded of Dr. Leonard Cole’s 1994 testimony before a Senate Committee regarding 45 years of open air testing during which military aircraft sprayed American cities with bacteria, fungus and carcinogenic chemicals.78 [21]

We are told that defense officials perpetrated these atrocities so that scientists could learn about how to “protect” Americans from attack. So why, in the late 80s, would our “protectors” fall all over themselves to supply Saddam Hussein’s war machine with 90 shipments of chemical and biological weaponry, including sarin, anthrax, botulism, brucella and West Nile Virus?80 [22]

To understand how our nation has arrived at this doomsday corruption, we must recall that immediately after WWII ended, the U.S. government initiated Operation Paperclip through which a large number of German Nazi scientists were imported to the United States. Once issued new identities, these death industry pros were employed in U.S. military laboratories to develop a dazzling array of secret weaponry projects.81 [23] With congressional funding, the crowning achievement of this nexus was the creation of ghastly new bioweapons, including the AIDS virus82 [24] and an incapacitating chronic fatigue agent engineered from mycoplasma and brucella.83 [25]

[Note: Operation Paperclip information http://www.operationpaperclip.info/ ]

That, dear readers, are some of the amazing, cold, hard facts about utilizing weather as a weapon, plus instilling fear, disease, and hardships in humans in order for controllers to obtain eventual and ‘freely-given’ control over U.S. citizens, who think they live in an uncontrolled society. Having all the ‘smart’ technology that consumers ‘suck up’, somehow has backfired into making consumers unaware of the horrific downsides that often accompany things we can hold in our hands, can spy on us, can change weather patterns, and make life and living unhealthful, or even endangered. Furthermore, it’s done under ostensible premises. Amy Worthington said:

The military is empowered to continue lethal experimentation by devious wording of Section 1520a Chapter 32 of U.S. Code Title 50. The law states that the Secretary of Defense may NOT conduct any chemical or biological test or experiment on civilian populations, unless such tests are for medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial purposes or for research in general or for protection against weapons or for law enforcement purposes, including riot control. So DOD may not use us for guinea pigs, unless it is for any “good” reason under the sun! The law states that human subjects must give informed consent. But a nasty loophole in Section 1515 of Chapter 32 allows informed consent to be suspended by executive order during a period of national emergency, a situation under which this nation perpetually labors by deliberate hobgoblin design. 

[Question: Do you know about Presidential Executive Orders?]

Numerous federal government critics and constitutionalists opine that U.S. citizens have been living under a national emergency ever since 1933 when then-president Franklin Delano Roosevelt declared a national emergency, plus other emergencies declared by

President Truman on December 16, 1950, during the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by President Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971. [26]

Furthermore,

In the “Foreword” to Senate Report 93-549, [93rd Congress: 1973-75] Senators Mathias and Church wrote, “[T]here is no present need for the United States Government to continue to function under emergency conditions.” Later, in the body of the report, they added, “In the view of the Special Committee, an emergency does not now exist. Congress, therefore, should act in the near future to terminate officially the states of national emergency now in effect.”(12) The U.S. Attorney General, however, was of a different opinion: [which was lengthy, but here are the consequences:]

As a consequence, a “national emergency” is now a practical necessity in order to carry out what has become the regular and normal method of governmental action. What were intended by Congress as delegations of power to be used only in the most extreme situations and for the most limited durations have become everyday powers; and a state of “emergency” has become a permanent condition [emphasis in original].(14) [26]

Did you know that?

If all the above hasn’t gotten readers’ attention then, perhaps, “10 Tracking Technologies You Should Know About” will. Here’s what they are:

1. Your Smart TV is listening
2. Microchip Implants
3. Cell Phone Towers Spoofers
4. License Plate Readers
5. Facial Recognition Cameras at Airports
6. Auto Tracking
7. Private Mobile Phone Tracking in Stores
8. Blanket Aerial Surveillance
9. DNA Fog
10. The Internet of Things

Is the USA a freely-government-controlled society implemented by numerous divisions of federal governmental agencies, their strategies and interferences [27, 28, 29]? What do you think?

To all the above, we need to add a TED speech in February of 2010 given by Bill Gates wherein at 2:08 to 2:15 on the timeline, readers hear Gates say this about Population [control], “If we do a really great job on new vaccines….we could lower that [population] by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WQtRI7A064

Question: Doesn’t that sound like a genuine eugenics program being rolled out? However, the rather disturbing part about the remark Gates made was this: No one in the audience challenged or called him on it! Are we wimps?

Are U.S. citizens overly apathetic? Hopefully, we’re not unbelievably stupid, totally buffaloed, or just don’t give a damn? So what’s to blame: political-party-loyalty-blinders, media head phones, TV proselytization, cultural memes, or what?

Perhaps, the solution can be found in getting off our mental duffs; doing online research on the Internet before controllers close it down; and learn what’s going on behind taxpayers’ backs with ‘a shadow government’ [30, 31, 32] that’s affecting freedoms, lifestyles and, even, life processes. Oh by the way, don’t forget to check out what’s known as ‘black ops’ operations.

Former President George H.W. Bush [No. 41] supposedly is on record in an interview with Sarah McClendon in 1992 as saying, “If the American people knew what we have done, they would string us up from the lamp posts.”

What do you think?

References: 

[1] 52. Lewin L. C et al. Report from Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace, New York: The Dial Press, 1967.
[2] 53. Trading With the Enemy, Charles Higham, Delacorte Press, 1983; Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, Antony Sutton, 1976; “IBM Sued by Holocaust Lawyers –100 other US Firms Targeted for Nazi Links,” Paterson and Wastel, The Telegraph, UK, 2-18-0l; “Ford and GM Scrutinized for Alleged Nazi Collaboration,” Michael Dobbs, Washington Post, 11-30-98; “How the Bush Family Made Its Fortune From the Nazis,” John Loftus, 7-2-02, http://www.rense.com . (John Loftus was a U.S. Department of Justice Nazi War Crimes prosecutor.)
[3] 55. Former German Defense Minister Confirms CIA Involvement in 9/11: Alex Jones Interviews Andreas von Bulow, 2-17-21, http://www.apfn.net
[4] 56. “Pentagon Tells Bush: Climate Change Will Destroy Us,” Mark Townsend and Paul Harris, The Observer, UK 2-24-04; “Climate Collapse, The Pentagon’s Weather Nightmare Could change Radically and Fast,” David Stipp, Fortune Magazine, 2-9-04.
[5] 57. The Dead Farmer’s Almanac, Who Really Controls the Weather? Jim Larranaga, Priority Publications, 2001.
[6] 58. Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather In 2025, June 17, 1996. This report was produced by directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force.http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf
[7] 59. “Very Weird Weather in Serbia, What’s Happening?” Goran Pavlovic, 10-30-03, rense.com.
[8] 60. “The Secret Nuclear War,” Eduardo Goncalves, The Ecologist, 3-22-01.
[9] 61. “Washington’s New World Order Weapons Have the Ability to Trigger Climate Change,” Center for Research on Globalization, Professor Michael Chossudovsky, University of Ottawa, January 2001.
[10] 62. “HAARP: Vandalism in the Sky?” Nick Begich and Jeane Manning, Nexus Magazine, December 1995.
[11] 63. Ibid.; also Castle, op. cit. Dr. Castle presents information on how HAARP punches massive holes in the open-air column ozone and how the Air Force then uses toxic chemicals to “patch” the holes it has created: Dr. Castle says: “Welsbach seeding and ozone hole remediation sciences utilize chemistries that are toxic to humans and the environment.”
[12] 64. “HAARP: Vandalism in the Sky?” Begich and Manning; Researcher David Yarrow is quoted as saying that Earth’s axial spin means that HAARP bursts are like a microwave knife producing a “long tear–an incision” in the multi-layer membrane of ionospheres that shield the Earth’s surface from intense solar radiation.
[13] 65. U.S. HAARP Weapon Development Concerns Russian Duma, Interfax News Agency, 8-10-02.
[14] 66. HAARP Update, Elfrad Group, http://elfrad.org/2000/Haarp2.htm 6-27-00.
[15] 67. “14 Hertz Signal Suppresses Rainfall, Induces Violent Winds,” 10-25-00, Newshawk Inc.; “When the Army Owns the Weather–Chemtrails and HAARP,” Bob Fitrakis, 2-13-02: In this article HAARP inventor Bernard Eastlund is quoted on how HAARP can affect the weather: “Significant experiments could be performed. The HAARP antenna as it is now configured modulates the auroral electrojet to induce ELF waves and thus could have an effect on the zonal winds.” Find this article with search engine at http://www.rense.com .
[16] 68. Angels Don’t Play This HAARP, Begich and Manning, op. cit.
[17] 69. Ibid.
[18] 70. “Space Based Weather Control: The ‘Thunderstorm Solar Power Satellite,’ ” Michael Theroux. See www.borderlands.com/spacewea.htm.
[19] 75. Undue Risk, Secret State Experiments on Humans, Jonathan D. Moreno, Freeman & Co. 1999: Moreno was a senior staff member of the President’s Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments which completed in 1995 its studies of horrific U.S. government radiation experiments conducted since World War II.
[20] 77. “Trouble With Tankers,” William Thomas, http://www.willthomas.net .
[21] 78. Testimony by Dr. Leonard A. Cole before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, May 6, 1994; also Clouds of Secrecy, The Army’s Germ Warfare Tests Over Populated Areas, Leonard A. Cole, Rowman & Littlefield, 1988.
[22] 80. Senate Banking Committee Report 103-900 (Riegle Report) issued May 25, 1994. This 551-page document contains a comprehensive list of biological and chemical warfare agents shipped to Saddam by U.S. companies under purview of the U.S. Commerce Department for use against Iran during the Iran-Iraq war in the late 80s during the regime of George Bush Sr.
[23] 81. Moreno, op.cit. “To this day few Americans know about the special top-secret program that brought German scientists to the United States after World War II, and fewer still know that their number included medical scientists. Code-named Operation Paper Clip…hundreds of ‘specialists’ …entered the United States under Joint Chiefs’ protection, avoiding regular immigration procedures and requirements…It is hard to escape the conclusion that many of the German recruits were for decades important consultants on a myriad of military-medical projects.”
[24] 82. Emerging Viruses: Aids and Ebola, Dr. Len Horowitz, Tetrahedron Inc., 1996.
[25] 83. The Brucellosis Triangle, Donald W. Scott, Chelmstreet Publishers, 1998.
[26] http://5ptsalt.com/2009/11/17/america-under-a-permanent-state-of-national-emergency-since-1933/
[27] http://www.infowars.com/exclusive-snowden-level-documents-reveal-stealth-dhs-spy-grid/
[28] http://www.cnet.com/news/dhs-built-domestic-surveillance-tech-into-predator-drones/
[29] http://www.globalresearch.ca/lawless-domestic-spying-homeland-security-s-national-applications-office-noa/32072
[30] http://www.constitution.org/shad4816.htm
[31] http://www.shadowstats.com/
[32] http://www.bilderberg.org/secret.htm

Resources: 

Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War 
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/WOR406A.html

NOAA “Extreme Events” 
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/climate-information/extreme-events

America – Under A Permanent State Of National Emergency Since 1933 
http://5ptsalt.com/2009/11/17/america-under-a-permanent-state-of-national-emergency-since-1933/

TED Conversation Archives – Shadow Government 
http://www.ted.com/conversations/21065/do_you_believe_there_is_a_shad.html

Catherine retired from researching and writing, but felt compelled to write this article. 

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)

 

Obama Unveils Plan to Further Nationalize Local Police

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thomas Jefferson

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/20305-

obama-unveils-plan-to-further-nationalize-local-police

by  Alex Newman

The Obama administration and its “Task Force on 21st Century Policing” are under fire after unveiling an unconstitutional plot to impose federal “standards” on state and local police forces, which critics say is in effect an underhanded plan to further nationalize and federalize law enforcement. Widely lambasted as “Common Core” for police, the Obama plan outlines dozens of controversial “recommendations” to be foisted on state and local law-enforcement agencies using federal tax dollars as bribes — the same unconstitutional process used to impose the hugely unpopular national “Common Core” standards on states and schools nationwide. Opponents say it is part of a dangerous long-term plan that must be opposed.

The controversial Obama administration demands for national standards for police come a few months after United Nations boss Ban Ki Moon called for American police to obey “international standards.” The efforts to further nationalize and federalize law enforcement — a state and local responsibility under America’s constitutional system — are also in line with Obama’s campaign rhetoric about building a “civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military. Of course, as Congress revealed in an official report, the Communist effort to nationalize American police forces goes back decades.

The Justice Department agency that would be responsible for bribing and bludgeoning police agencies into submission to Obama’s “national standards” is also among the outfits that have been abused to militarize law enforcement all across America. AsThe New American reported last year amid the George Soros-funded chaos in Ferguson, Obama attacked the militarization of law enforcement — even though his administration has played a crucial role in militarizing police departments nationwide. The federal government, of course, has no constitutional authority to meddle in state and local law enforcement to begin with.

After meeting with his “task force” on “21st century policing,” created via executive order, Obama celebrated the scheme to bring law enforcement further under the control of his administration. He also argued that it must be done quickly. “I’m going to be asking Eric Holder and the Justice Department and his successor to go through all of these recommendations so that we can start implementing them,” Obama explained. “I know one area that’s going to be of great interest is whether we can expand the [DOJ Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)] program that in the past has been very effective, continues to be effective, but is largely underfunded.”

To Obama, of course, virtually every unconstitutional bloated federal agency and program is “underfunded.” However, in reality, the Constitution he swore to uphold does not authorize a “COPS” program or anything like it, so any funding at all is too much funding based on the obective standard laid out in the Supreme Law of the Land. As the interim report was being released on March 2, though, Obama glossed over those issues, saying the plot offered a “great opportunity” to “really transform how we think about community law enforcement relations.” “We need to seize that opportunity,” Obama added, echoing the “never let a crisis go to waste” rhetoric of other statists. “This is something that I’m going to stay very focused on in the months to come.”

According to the interim report by Obama’s task force, two DOJ tentacles, the COPS scheme and the Office of Justice Programs, “should provide technical assistance and incentive funding to jurisdictions with small police agencies that take steps toward shared services, in return for receiving federal funds.” Why the federal government cares whether small police departments share services was not entirely clear, though critics see a transparent effort to further strip local communities of their right to self-government and local accountability. The Office of Justice Programs recently came under fire for providing taxpayer-funded grants to a “community group” in New York that participated in the production of a rap video literally promoting the murder of police officers.

The stepped-up federalization of law-enforcement scheming also involves bribing state and local law enforcement with U.S. tax dollars to feed even more information on citizens to Washington, D.C., bureaucracies already infamous for abusing sensitive and private information. “There is a lack of uniformity in data collection throughout law enforcement, and only patchwork methods of near real time information exists,” the controversial report complained. “These problems are especially critical in light of the threats from terrorism and cybercrime.” The Justice Department came under major criticism in 2012 after it was exposed training state and local police to link mainstream political activism with terrorism — including just the display of political bumper stickers!

Critics say Obama’s plan ought to be ringing alarm bells. “Americans everywhere should be very concerned about federal oversight of local police agencies,” explained former detective Jim Fitzgerald, the national field director for The John Birch Society, the parent organization of this magazine. The constitutionalist group, which has chapters in all 50 states, has been running a campaign for decades called “Support Your Local Police and Keep them Independent.” The effort is meant to, among other goals, protect local communities from having their police departments turned into tentacles of an all-powerful federal government.

“These steps to exercise and take control over police departments should raise a red flag among police officials and give deep concern to anyone who understands the history of national police forces,” continued Fitzgerald. “Have we so soon forgotten the Gestapo or the KGB, both national police agencies, that terrorized the citizens of Germany and Russia and led to the imprisonment and deaths of tens thousands of innocent men and women? Has there ever been a national police force that benefited the citizens who live under it? Never!”

Of course, as readers of The New American know well, the Department of Justice has long been criticized for its efforts to hijack control of local law enforcement from citizens and communities. The current head of the DOJ, Attorney General Eric Holder, remains in criminal contempt of Congress for trying to cover up his “Fast and Furious” arming of Mexican drug cartels — a plot that official documents showed was being exploited to advance more attacks on the gun rights of Americans. Several of the Obama administration’s “Fast and Furious” guns have turned up at crime scenes in which U.S. law-enforcement officers were murdered.

In 2013, meanwhile, the Justice Department was exposed working with an extremist anti-Christian group, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which inspired a deranged homosexual activist to attempt a mass-murder terrorist attack on a pro-family organization. The year before that, the DOJ was exposed demonizing Americans as potential terrorists for their political views in controversial “training programs” for state and local police. The abuses are almost endless, with more than two thirds of Americanssaying the federal government is “out of control” and a threat to liberty.

The history behind efforts to nationalize police forces should also spark alarm over Obama’s plan. It is worth recalling that Communist efforts to nationalize local police forces across the United States date back to at least the 1960s. Toward that end, communist agitators, along with their front groups and useful idiots, have long created problems or exploited existing ones to drum up hatred and violence against police. In recent anti-police marches, communist-made signs and slogans were visible everywhere. But it is hardly a new development.

In an official 1961 report entitled “A Communist Plot Against the Free World Police,” the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Congress explained how communist agents across the West were working to nationalize and federalize police forces — with a special focus on the United States. The explosive study documents, among other elements of the strategy, the forming of mobs to attack police. Obama’s own radical background and associations with communist terrorists — including launching his political career in the home of Castro-backed terrorist leader Bill Ayers — should provide further cause for concern. His racialist anti-police comments, blurted out every time a suitable incident emerges to be exploited, should also offer warnings of the true agenda.

In the end, the Constitution does not authorize Obama’s “national standards” for police, or the taxpayer-funded bribes being used to spread them nationwide. That means the scheme is unconstitutional on its face. Even if it were constitutional, though, history shows that it would be a terrible and dangerous idea. Police departments should be responsible to the communities that fund them and that they are supposed to serve — not Obama, Holder, or the UN and its “international standards.” To allow further federalization of America’s police agencies is a sure recipe for disaster.

Photo of President Barack Obama: AP Images

Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at

anewman@thenewamerican.com

 

Related articles:

Justice Department Grants Linked to Cop-killing Rap Video

Obama Flooding U.S. Streets With “Weapons of War” for Local Police

UN Boss Pushes “International Standards” for Ferguson Police

After Militarizing Police, Obama Urges “Peace” in Ferguson

Federalized Police and a Police Czar?

Cop: We Need Military Equipment Because of “Constitutionalists”

Obama’s Political Career Began With Castro-backed Terrorist

Why Is Homeland Security Taking Control of Local Police?

Extremist Group Exposed Working With Obama’s Justice Department

Ferguson, New York Cases Used to Push Nationalized Police

Obama Justice Department Pushes to Target “Thought Crime”

Justice Department Trained Police to Link Political Activism With Terror

Amid Cloud of Scandal, Attorney General Holder to Resign

Police Consolidation: The End of Local Law Enforcement?

Obama Adm. Targets Pro-life Activists as Terrorists

 

SOME THOUGHTS ON LIBERTY, AND HOW TO GET IT BACK

By Olddog

“Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.”- John Adams

Last Saturday the 03 07 15 I Re-Published two articles at these addresses

 The Cataclysmic Conflict Yet to Come And What We Can Do To Stop It

and ROLLING STONE  ROTHSCHILD CORRUPTION GOES MAINSTREAM

 Those of you who have read both articles should well understand that the principles on which we were told America was founded on are now relics of the past. We who survive the next few years are going to have a life of living hell. I have no doubts that this condition is the results of our own apathy, and voracious pursuit of pleasure, but neither do I intend on accepting the living hell as though there is no other alternative. That “alternative” is something I am willing to die for!

Again, if you have read both articles, you have probably been reading others of similar content, but are now convinced that we are facing an enemy so powerful that we cannot even begin to recover our once free status as law abiding citizens. Do you see as I do that nothing can possibly be done to correct the present system of governance? There is no hope! America is lost!

So what do we do now?

The only acceptable answer is that we start over the same way we were told our ancestors did, by telling the powers that be to shove it up their ass, and refuse to comply, with the objective of rebuilding another America with the principle of freedom as the soul objective of a new set of rules that will control the new government from ever being coerced again. We have learned the hard way that to take our eyes off the government is to invite tyranny to creep back in, and that is why we will draft a document that leaves nothing to be questioned. We are a hell of a lot more experienced from having experienced this disaster, and know for certain that contracts will be broken just as soon as we take our eyes off of those who swear their allegiance to uphold them and protect our freedom. We are now ready to form a bullet proof document that will keep our administrators on the straight and narrow path of obedience, or lose their life in a very painful and unhurried manner.

We now know that it is not possible for hundreds of millions of people to govern their actions based only on their own desires, and a central concept of obedience to law is imperative to the security of our Nation and the people who populate it. That is what written doctrines are for, to explain in no uncertain terms what is and what is not permitted, and they should be written in the common mans vernacular, so as to leave no room for misinterpretation.

Today’s society has been brain washed to object to permanent and inflexible doctrines, and that leaves open the door of tyranny to creep in by the use of linguistic gymnast posing as judges and lawyers. We know better now. One cannot do or say everything that suddenly pops in our head, such as; I am going to beat that old bastard next door senseless for cussing out my children, just because they stepped on his flowers. NO YOU CANNOT DO THAT WITHOUT BEING SUED AND OR THROWN IN JAIL! OR, I AM GOING TO KILL THAT QUEER FOR RAPING MY SON, which means we must address the divisive problem of marriage and homosexuality. As human beings we are subject to various levels of intelligence and personal beliefs and inflexible laws are difficult for some people to obey, but never the less, every one must accept.

Those are the kind of problems we must address in our new Constitution in minute detail, so as to leave no room for error. A good example is the way commerce was left open to enumerable interpretations in our first Constitution. Read it, and see for yourself how lacking it is in determining what is and what is not lawful. Maybe the framers had writer’s cramps, or maybe they were paid to leave the door open for future profit. Who knows?

We are going to have to address the problem of multiple interpretations in how we conduct commerce, personal relations, Banking, currency, and many more subjects, but we simply cannot have any law that is not completely expanded and explained, and expect it to govern effectively, fairly and not have to wade through thousands of freedom limiting laws only lawyers can understand. We must also address the problem of international relations, and how to keep our Nation, our people, and our States as sovereigns, and make restitution for the atrocities we have committed to other Nations.

Whether we want a national government at all, or just a department must be examined. To leave open the door to hell because we have many thousands of opinions on every subject ever thought of is to admit we have not the intelligence or commitment to build a just and orderly society, because we want to do as we please, when we please, and to hell with other peoples idea of what is acceptable behavior. Suck it up Americans; we have work to do, and enemies to subdue.

OH, one more thing, if you think we can do this without Gods help, you have excrement for brains!!! God given rights means, no government, person, or other bodies, can override them, and (NO God) means, NO PERMANENT RIGHTS! That’s how we got in this mess. If you don’t like what I have written here, give me a better solution, and be prepared to participate in the rebirth of the greatest nation on earth. This time it will really be the people who design our future.  olddog@anationbeguiled.com

I am not stupid enough to be unaware that some people will be very angry with me for this article, but I am ready and willing to take on all who are too stupid or bull headed to participate in a gentlemanly manor. Don’t F#$k with me! If you have nothing constructive to say, piss off!

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

 

 

 

ROLLING STONE ROTHSCHILD CORRUPTION GOES MAINSTREAM

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2013/05/10/rolling-stone-rothschild-corruption-goes-mainstream/

 By Volubrjotr

Jacob Rothschild

Rolling Stones ~”Conspiracy theorists of the world, believers in

the hidden hands of the Rothschilds, the Masons and the

Illuminati, we skeptics owe you an apology”.

You were right.

The players may be a little different, but your basic premise is correct: The world is a rigged game. We found this out in recent months, when a series of related corruption stories spilled out of the financial sector, suggesting the world’s largest banks may be fixing the prices of, well, just about everything.

• Obama’s NWO Successfully Removed From Egypt: Egypt Joins Russia!
• Georgia Halts Obamacare: State Law Goes Into Full Effect Today July 1st 2014.
• Russian Su-25 Ground Attack Jets Bombing U.S. Trained U.S. Deployed U.S. Financed ISIS In Iraq: Video!
• Iraqi Shiites ‘minority’ Join Iraqi Sunnis ‘majority’: Ousting Obama Puppet Nouri al-Maliki From Prime Minister’s Office.
• Breaking => Supreme Court Protects Christians From Unconstitutional Obamacare Mandates: Common Core The Abortion Of Freedom!
• Another Dead U.S. ISIS False Flag Attack: Non Stop NWO Propaganda To Start WWIII To Hide Their Loot. Oh By The Way, Kuwait To Sell Oil In Bitcoins

BARRY SOETORO

1. New Global Challenge: Can We de-Rothschild The World? Pravda.Ru
2. Oil Prices Retreat After Biggest Monthly Gain This Year June 2014: Little Chance Of NWO ISIS Dog & Pony Show In Iraq Disrupting Oil Supply!
3. S. ISIS In Iraq: Rothschild Middle East Geopolitical Arsonists Seek to Burn Region ~ But Not One NWO U.S. Taxpayer Oil Pipeline Touched That Carries Oil To The Muslim Brotherhood In Jordan & Turkey.

You may have heard of the Libor scandal, in which at least three – and perhaps as many as 16 – of the name-brand too-big-to-fail banks have been manipulating global interest rates, in the process messing around with the prices of upward of $500 trillion (that’s trillion, with a “t”) worth of financial instruments. When that sprawling con burst into public view last year, it was easily the biggest financial scandal in history – MIT professor Andrew Lo even said it “dwarfs by orders of magnitude any financial scam in the history of markets.”

That was bad enough, but now Libor may have a twin brother. Word has leaked out that the London-based firm ICAP, the world’s largest broker of interest-rate swaps, is being investigated by American authorities for behavior that sounds eerily reminiscent of the Libor mess. Regulators are looking into whether or not a small group of brokers at ICAP may have worked with up to 15 of the world’s largest banks to manipulate ISDAfix, a benchmark number used around the world to calculate the prices of interest-rate swaps.

Baucus, Soetoro, Roberts, Reid, Japanese National, Japanese National

1. Hungary Kills The Rothschild Banks: Ordered To Vacate Country.
2. Obamacare Designed To Fail: The ‘Kamikaze’ Attempt To Take Without Giving!
3. Doubling Down Against Rothschild’s New World Order: Russia, China, Egypt, Iceland, Ireland, Hungary, Iran, & Crimea.
4. Another Banker Dead: IRAN Executes Rothschild Billionaire On $2.6 Billion Bank Fraud ~ Used Fraudulent Funds To Implement Agenda 21 In Buying State Property.

Interest-rate swaps are a tool used by big cities, major corporations and sovereign governments to manage their debt, and the scale of their use is almost unimaginably massive. It’s about a $379 trillion market, meaning that any manipulation would affect a pile of assets about 100 times the size of the United States federal budget.

It should surprise no one that among the players implicated in this scheme to fix the prices of interest-rate swaps are the same megabanks – including Barclays, UBS, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and the Royal Bank of Scotland – that serve on the Libor panel that sets global interest rates.

Vladimir Putin Speech: 85% Of The 1917 Soviet Government Was Made Up By Rothschild Jews {Jew Being A Misnomer} Zionist Khazars Being More Accurate.

In fact, in recent years many of these banks have already paid multimillion-dollar settlements for anti-competitive manipulation of one form or another (in addition to Libor, some were caught up in an anti-competitive scheme, detailed in Rolling Stone last year, to rig municipal-debt service auctions).

Though the jumble of financial acronyms sounds like gibberish to the layperson, the fact that there may now be price-fixing scandals involving both Libor and ISDAfix suggests a single, giant mushrooming conspiracy of collusion and price-fixing hovering under the ostensibly competitive veneer of Wall Street culture.

1. JFK Killed Just Days After Shutting Down Rothschild’s Fed Reserve In 1963: Secret Memo Shows President Signed Executive Orders EO-11 And EO-110! ORDERS ARE STILL IN FORCE BUT NOT ENFORCED!!!

Why? Because Libor already affects the prices of interest-rate swaps, making this a manipulation-on-manipulation situation. If the allegations prove to be right, that will mean that swap customers have been paying for two different layers of price-fixing corruption.

If you can imagine paying 20 bucks for a crappy PB&J because some evil cabal of agribusiness companies colluded to fix the prices of both peanuts and peanut butter, you come close to grasping the lunacy of financial markets where both interest rates and interest-rate swaps are being manipulated at the same time, often by the same banks.

“It’s a double conspiracy,” says an amazed Michael Greenberger, a former director of the trading and markets division at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and now a professor at the University of Maryland. “It’s the height of criminality.”

PRESIDENT ANDREW JACKSON

• I Killed The Bank ~ President Andrew Jackson: U.S. Vice President Aaron Burr Shoots A Rothschild Czar ~ Rothschild’s Bank Agent Alexander Hamilton!

The bad news didn’t stop with swaps and interest rates. In March, it also came out that two regulators – the CFTC here in the U.S. and the Madrid-based International Organization of Securities Commissions – were spurred by the Libor revelations to investigate the possibility of collusive manipulation of gold and silver prices. “Given the clubby manipulation efforts we saw in Libor benchmarks, I assume other benchmarks – many other benchmarks – are legit areas of inquiry,” CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton said.

But the biggest shock came out of a federal courtroom at the end of March – though if you follow these matters closely, it may not have been so shocking at all – when a landmark class-action civil lawsuit against the banks for Libor-related offenses was dismissed. In that case, a federal judge accepted the banker-defendants’ incredible argument: If cities and towns and other investors lost money because of Libor manipulation, that was their own fault for ever thinking the banks were competing in the first place.

“A farce,” was one antitrust lawyer’s response to the eyebrow-raising dismissal.

“Incredible,” says Sylvia Sokol, an attorney for Constantine Cannon, a firm that specializes in antitrust cases.

All of these stories collectively pointed to the same thing: These banks, which already possess enormous power just by virtue of their financial holdings – in the United States, the top six banks, many of them the same names you see on the Libor and ISDAfix panels, own assets equivalent to 60 percent of the nation’s GDP – are beginning to realize the awesome possibilities for increased profit and political might that would come with colluding instead of competing. Moreover, it’s increasingly clear that both the criminal justice system and the civil courts may be impotent to stop them, even when they do get caught working together to game the system.

If true, that would leave us living in an era of undisguised, real-world conspiracy, in which the prices of currencies, commodities like gold and silver, even interest rates and the value of money itself, can be and may already have been dictated from above. And those who are doing it can get away with it. Forget the Illuminati – this is the real thing, and it’s no secret. You can stare right at it, anytime you want.

The banks found a loophole, a basic flaw in the machine. Across the financial system, there are places where prices or official indices are set based upon unverified data sent in by private banks and financial companies. In other words, we gave the players with incentives to game the system institutional roles in the economic infrastructure.

Red Hidden Hand Of The City Of London

1. BREAKING => CNN Goldman Sachs & The Rothschild Zionist Matrix: Landmark Case ~ Rothschildism Delineated From Abrahamic Judaism!!

Libor, which measures the prices banks charge one another to borrow money, is a perfect example, not only of this basic flaw in the price-setting system but of the weakness in the regulatory framework supposedly policing it. Couple a voluntary reporting scheme with too-big-to-fail status and a revolving-door legal system, and what you get is unstoppable corruption.

Every morning, 18 of the world’s biggest banks submit data to an office in London about how much they believe they would have to pay to borrow from other banks. The 18 banks together are called the “Libor panel,” and when all of these data from all 18 panelist banks are collected, the numbers are averaged out. What emerges, every morning at 11:30 London time, are the daily Libor figures.

Banks submit numbers about borrowing in 10 different currencies across 15 different time periods, e.g., loans as short as one day and as long as one year. This mountain of bank-submitted data is used every day to create benchmark rates that affect the prices of everything from credit cards to mortgages to currencies to commercial loans (both short- and long-term) to swaps.

Gangster Bankers Broke Every Law in the Book

Dating back perhaps as far as the early Nineties, traders and others inside these banks were sometimes calling up the company geeks responsible for submitting the daily Libor numbers (the “Libor submitters”) and asking them to fudge the numbers. Usually, the gimmick was the trader had made a bet on something – a swap, currencies, something – and he wanted the Libor submitter to make the numbers look lower (or, occasionally, higher) to help his bet pay off.

Memories Of History: When The People Get Fed Up!

This Is What Happens When Leaders Decide To Be Puppets For The Rothschild Central Bankers!

Famously, one Barclays trader monkeyed with Libor submissions in exchange for a bottle of Bollinger champagne, but in some cases, it was even lamer than that. This is from an exchange between a trader and a Libor submitter at the Royal Bank of Scotland:

SWISS FRANC TRADER: can u put 6m swiss libor in low pls?…
PRIMARY SUBMITTER: Whats it worth
SWSISS FRANC TRADER: ive got some sushi rolls from yesterday?…
PRIMARY SUBMITTER: ok low 6m, just for u
SWISS FRANC TRADER: wooooooohooooooo. . . thatd be awesome

1. John Kerry’s Syrian Amityville Horror: Violates The United State’s Constitution War Powers Act & International Law!
2. Jordan to Head Syria Rebel Arms Program: Following Obama/Kerry Visit ~ Jordan Promised 1,056 Double Oil Pipe Line from Iraq ~ Jordan Now Helps Rothschilds Tumble Syria’s Central Bank!

Screwing around with world interest rates that affect billions of people in exchange for day-old sushi – it’s hard to imagine an image that better captures the moral insanity of the modern financial-services sector.

Hundreds of similar exchanges were uncovered when regulators like Britain’s Financial Services Authority and the U.S. Justice Department started burrowing into the befouled entrails of Libor. The documentary evidence of anti-competitive manipulation they found was so overwhelming that, to read it, one almost becomes embarrassed for the banks. “It’s just amazing how Libor fixing can make you that much money,” chirped one yen trader. “Pure manipulation going on,” wrote another.

Yet despite so many instances of at least attempted manipulation, the banks mostly skated. Barclays got off with a relatively minor fine in the $450 million range, UBS was stuck with $1.5 billion in penalties, and RBS was forced to give up $615 million. Apart from a few low-level flunkies overseas, no individual involved in this scam that impacted nearly everyone in the industrialized world was even threatened with criminal prosecution.

Two of America’s top law-enforcement officials, Attorney General Eric Holder and former Justice Department Criminal Division chief Lanny Breuer, confessed that it’s dangerous to prosecute offending banks because they are simply too big. Making arrests, they say, might lead to “collateral consequences” in the economy.

The relatively small sums of money extracted in these settlements did not go toward reparations for the cities, towns and other victims who lost money due to Libor manipulation. Instead, it flowed mindlessly into government coffers. So it was left to towns and cities like Baltimore (which lost money due to fluctuations in their municipal investments caused by Libor movements), pensions like the New Britain, Connecticut, Firefighters’ and Police Benefit Fund, and other foundations – and even individuals (billionaire real-estate developer Sheldon Solow, who filed his own suit in February, claims that his company lost $450 million because of Libor manipulation) – to sue the banks for damages.

One of the biggest Libor suits was proceeding on schedule when, early in March, an army of superstar lawyers working on behalf of the banks descended upon federal judge Naomi Buchwald in the Southern District of New York to argue an extraordinary motion to dismiss. The banks’ legal dream team drew from heavyweight Beltway-connected firms like Boies Schiller (you remember David Boies represented Al Gore), Davis Polk (home of top ex-regulators like former SEC enforcement chief Linda Thomsen) and Covington & Burling, the onetime private-practice home of both Holder and Breuer.

George Soros As The Fighting Uruk-hai With Jacob Rothschild As Saruman

• Two Authors Warned Us About Rothschild’s Banking Cabal: Baum & Tolkien ~ Wizard Of Oz & Lord Of The Rings

The presence of Covington & Burling in the suit – representing, of all companies, Citigroup, the former employer of current Treasury Secretary Jack Lew – was particularly galling. Right as the Libor case was being dismissed, the firm had hired none other than Lanny Breuer, the same Lanny Breuer who, just a few months before, was the assistant attorney general who had balked at criminally prosecuting UBS over Libor because, he said, “Our goal here is not to destroy a major financial institution.”

In any case, this all-star squad of white-shoe lawyers came before Buchwald and made the mother of all audacious arguments. Robert Wise of Davis Polk, representing Bank of America, told Buchwald that the banks could not possibly be guilty of anti- competitive collusion because nobody ever said that the creation of Libor was competitive. “It is essential to our argument that this is not a competitive process,” he said. “The banks do not compete with one another in the submission of Libor.”

If you squint incredibly hard and look at the issue through a mirror, maybe while standing on your head, you can sort of see what Wise is saying. In a very theoretical, technical sense, the actual process by which banks submit Libor data – 18 geeks sending numbers to the British Bankers’ Association offices in London once every morning – is not competitive per se.

President Lincoln’s Plan Of Doing Away With Rothschild’s Federal Reserve.

But these numbers are supposed to reflect interbank-loan prices derived in a real, competitive market. Saying the Libor submission process is not competitive is sort of like pointing out that bank robbers obeyed the speed limit on the way to the heist. It’s the silliest kind of legal sophistry.

But Wise eventually outdid even that argument, essentially saying that while the banks may have lied to or cheated their customers, they weren’t guilty of the particular crime of antitrust collusion. This is like the old joke about the lawyer who gets up in court and claims his client had to be innocent, because his client was committing a crime in a different state at the time of the offense.

“The plaintiffs, I believe, are confusing a claim of being perhaps deceived,” he said, “with a claim for harm to competition.”

Judge Buchwald swallowed this lunatic argument whole and dismissed most of the case. Libor, she said, was a “cooperative endeavor” that was “never intended to be competitive.” Her decision “does not reflect the reality of this business, where all of these banks were acting as competitors throughout the process,” said the antitrust lawyer Sokol. Buchwald made this ruling despite the fact that both the U.S. and British governments had already settled with three banks for billions of dollars for improper manipulation, manipulation that these companies admitted to in their settlements.

Michael Hausfeld of Hausfeld LLP, one of the lead lawyers for the plaintiffs in this Libor suit, declined to comment specifically on the dismissal. But he did talk about the significance of the Libor case and other manipulation cases now in the pipeline.

“It’s now evident that there is a ubiquitous culture among the banks to collude and cheat their customers as many times as they can in as many forms as they can conceive,” he said. “And that’s not just surmising. This is just based upon what they’ve been caught at.”

Greenberger says the lack of serious consequences for the Libor scandal has only made other kinds of manipulation more inevitable. “There’s no therapy like sending those who are used to wearing Gucci shoes to jail,” he says. “But when the attorney general says, ‘I don’t want to indict people,’ it’s the Wild West. There’s no law.”

The problem is, a number of markets feature the same infrastructural weakness that failed in the Libor mess. In the case of interest-rate swaps and the ISDAfix benchmark, the system is very similar to Libor, although the investigation into these markets reportedly focuses on some different types of improprieties.

Though interest-rate swaps are not widely understood outside the finance world, the root concept actually isn’t that hard. If you can imagine taking out a variable-rate mortgage and then paying a bank to make your loan payments fixed, you’ve got the basic idea of an interest-rate swap.

In practice, it might be a country like Greece or a regional government like Jefferson County, Alabama, that borrows money at a variable rate of interest, then later goes to a bank to “swap” that loan to a more predictable fixed rate. In its simplest form, the customer in a swap deal is usually paying a premium for the safety and security of fixed interest rates, while the firm selling the swap is usually betting that it knows more about future movements in interest rates than its customers.

Infernal Mafia Funds

1. IMF Sends Message “Raise The Debt Ceiling” ~ Charlie Manson Sends Patricia Krenwinkel
2. The IMF & Rothschild’s Federal Reserve In The USA About To Merge: The Impact On You In Layman Language ~ To Get You Up To Speed As Quickly As Possible!

Prices for interest-rate swaps are often based on ISDAfix, which, like Libor, is yet another of these privately calculated benchmarks. ISDAfix’s U.S. dollar rates are published every day, at 11:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., after a gang of the same usual-suspect megabanks (Bank of America, RBS, Deutsche, JPMorgan Chase, Barclays, etc.) submits information about bids and offers for swaps.

And here’s what we know so far: The CFTC has sent subpoenas to ICAP and to as many as 15 of those member banks, and plans to interview about a dozen ICAP employees from the company’s office in Jersey City, New Jersey. Moreover, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, or ISDA, which works together with ICAP (for U.S. dollar transactions) and Thomson Reuters to compute the ISDAfix benchmark, has hired the consulting firm Oliver Wyman to review the process by which ISDAfix is calculated. Oliver Wyman is the same company that the British Bankers’ Association hired to review the Libor submission process after that scandal broke last year. The upshot of all of this is that it looks very much like ISDAfix could be Libor all over again.

“It’s obviously reminiscent of the Libor manipulation issue,” Darrell Duffie, a finance professor at Stanford University, told reporters. “People may have been naive that simply reporting these rates was enough to avoid manipulation.”

And just like in Libor, the potential losers in an interest-rate-swap manipulation scandal would be the same sad-sack collection of cities, towns, companies and other nonbank entities that have no way of knowing if they’re paying the real price for swaps or a price being manipulated by bank insiders for profit. Moreover, ISDAfix is not only used to calculate prices for interest-rate swaps, it’s also used to set values for about $550 billion worth of bonds tied to commercial real estate, and also affects the payouts on some state-pension annuities.

So although it’s not quite as widespread as Libor, ISDAfix is sufficiently power-jammed into the world financial infrastructure that any manipulation of the rate would be catastrophic – and a huge class of victims that could include everyone from state pensioners to big cities to wealthy investors in structured notes would have no idea they were being robbed.

“How is some municipality in Cleveland or wherever going to know if it’s getting ripped off?” asks Michael Masters of Masters Capital Management, a fund manager who has long been an advocate of greater transparency in the derivatives world. “The answer is, they won’t know.”

Worse still, the CFTC investigation apparently isn’t limited to possible manipulation of swap prices by monkeying around with ISDAfix. According to reports, the commission is also looking at whether or not employees at ICAP may have intentionally delayed publication of swap prices, which in theory could give someone (bankers, cough, cough) a chance to trade ahead of the information.

1. Dodd Frank & Basel III Enacted Treason Against The United States: Wealth Funneled Into Rothschild’s [BOE] Bank Of England.

Swap prices are published when ICAP employees manually enter the data on a computer screen called “19901.” Some 6,000 customers subscribe to a service that allows them to access the data appearing on the 19901 screen.

The key here is that unlike a more transparent, regulated market like the New York Stock Exchange, where the results of stock trades are computed more or less instantly and everyone in theory can immediately see the impact of trading on the prices of stocks, in the swap market the whole world is dependent upon a handful of brokers quickly and honestly entering data about trades by hand into a computer terminal.

Any delay in entering price data would provide the banks involved in the transactions with a rare opportunity to trade ahead of the information. One way to imagine it would be to picture a racetrack where a giant curtain is pulled over the track as the horses come down the stretch – and the gallery is only told two minutes later which horse actually won. Anyone on the right side of the curtain could make a lot of smart bets before the audience saw the results of the race.

At ICAP, the interest-rate swap desk, and the 19901 screen, were reportedly controlled by a small group of 20 or so brokers, some of whom were making millions of dollars. These brokers made so much money for themselves the unit was nicknamed “Treasure Island.”

Already, there are some reports that brokers of Treasure Island did create such intentional delays. Bloomberg interviewed a former broker who claims that he watched ICAP brokers delay the reporting of swap prices. “That allows dealers to tell the brokers to delay putting trades into the system instead of in real time,” Bloomberg wrote, noting the former broker had “witnessed such activity firsthand.” An ICAP spokesman has no comment on the story, though the company has released a statement saying that it is “cooperating” with the CFTC’s inquiry and that it “maintains policies that prohibit” the improper behavior alleged in news reports.

The idea that prices in a $379 trillion market could be dependent on a desk of about 20 guys in New Jersey should tell you a lot about the absurdity of our financial infrastructure. The whole thing, in fact, has a darkly comic element to it. “It’s almost hilarious in the irony,” says David Frenk, director of research for Better Markets, a financial-reform advocacy group, “that they called it ISDAfix.”

After scandals involving libor and, perhaps, ISDAfix, the question that should have everyone freaked out is this: What other markets out there carry the same potential for manipulation? The answer to that question is far from reassuring, because the potential is almost everywhere. From gold to gas to swaps to interest rates, prices all over the world are dependent upon little private cabals of cigar-chomping insiders we’re forced to trust.

“In all the over-the-counter markets, you don’t really have pricing except by a bunch of guys getting together,” Masters notes glumly.

 

Convicted Felon George Soros Rothschild Henchman!

Barack Obama: “We’re five days away from the fundamental transformation of the United States.”

That includes the markets for gold (where prices are set by five banks in a Libor-ish teleconferencing process that, ironically, was created in part by N M Rothschild & Sons) and silver (whose price is set by just three banks), as well as benchmark rates in numerous other commodities – jet fuel, diesel, electric power, coal, you name it.

The problem in each of these markets is the same: We all have to rely upon the honesty of companies like Barclays (already caught and fined $453 million for rigging Libor) or JPMorgan Chase (paid a $228 million settlement for rigging municipal-bond auctions) or UBS (fined a collective $1.66 billion for both muni-bond rigging and Libor manipulation) to faithfully report the real prices of things like interest rates, swaps, currencies and commodities.

1. United Front Against Austerity aka; Rothschildism!

All of these benchmarks based on voluntary reporting are now being looked at by regulators around the world, and God knows what they’ll find. The European Federation of Financial Services Users wrote in an official EU survey last summer that all of these systems are ripe targets for manipulation. “In general,” it wrote, “those markets which are based on non-attested, voluntary submission of data from agents whose benefits depend on such benchmarks are especially vulnerable of market abuse and distortion.”

Translation: When prices are set by companies that can profit by manipulating them, we’re fucked.

Jacob ~ Legend in His Own Mind

Vatican vs Illuminati

“You name it,” says Frenk. “Any of these benchmarks is a possibility for corruption.”

The only reason this problem has not received the attention it deserves is because the scale of it is so enormous that ordinary people simply cannot see it. It’s not just stealing by reaching a hand into your pocket and taking out money, but stealing in which banks can hit a few keystrokes and magically make whatever’s in your pocket worth less. This is corruption at the molecular level of the economy, Space Age stealing – and it’s only just coming into view.

Here In Reality

1. Obama & Hitler From No Where: Thats How Rothschild Likes It.
2. The New World Order is “Communism”: Also Known As Rothschildism Or More Bluntly Robbery!

RELATED ARTICLES

• Finland Braces For End Of NWO Eurozone!(politicalvelcraft.org)

• Re-Investigation Of 9/11 Campaign Gains World Momentum: Italy Supreme Court Submits U.S. 9/11 Crimes Against Humanity To International Criminal Tribunal!

PCR Interviewed by pravda.ru about America History Curriculum

 PCR Interviewed by pravda.ru about the attempt by the Advanced Placement History Curriculum to introduce some honesty into the teaching of US history

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/10/03/pcr-interviewed-pravda-ru-attempt-advanced-placement-history-curriculum-introduce-honesty-teaching-us-history/

By PCR & pravda.ru editor

The tendency of US history textbooks is to justify any US atrocity from the point of view of the defense of US interests. “Exceptional” America is exempt from laws of morality applied to other countries.

Republicans are attempting to prevent the introduction of the Advanced Placement curriculum until the textbook can be “revised” in order to ensure that students are propagandized rather than informed.

The editors of pravda.ru asked PCR for his view of the matter. This is what he said:

“In my opinion, the Republican Party today and a majority of Americans who think of themselves as conservatives are not, in fact, traditional American conservatives.  They comprise a form of brownshirts who are intolerant of dissent and want to impose social control.  They support government instead of the Constitution, and they frown on civil liberty as a form of legal permissiveness that coddles criminals and terrorists.

“These so-called conservatives attribute the US defeat in Vietnam to student protests and to journalists who disputed Washington’s lies. They regard protests as a threat to the status quo, and not as a way to express public dissent from government policies.  Conservatives are for democracy only as long as they control behavior in the democracy.

“In the 1940s and 1950s public school courses such as history and literature were largely up to the individual teacher. Consequently, there was a lot of diversity in what was taught. As time passed, especially after the 1964 Civil Rights Act and school integration, courses became increasingly standardized, partly in order to judge school performance with standardized state or national testing, and partly, according to some, to ensure that minorities were not offended by course content.  The obvious consequence is that a form of national brainwashing was put in place that instilled in the young acceptable beliefs  about their country.

“For the so-called conservatives, any criticism of America is an unpatriotic act.  In the 21st century it has become increasingly difficult to protest in the US.  The former Director of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, declared that the new department had shifted its focus from terrorists to “domestic extremists,” a group she defined as war protesters, environmentalists, and animal rights advocates.  Indeed, a national police force called Homeland Security itself indicates an increasing concern with protecting those in control from dissent.

“The increasing gratuitous violence of police against members of the public is also an indication that there has been a fundamental shift in the position of the government in relation to the people.  The purpose of government in the US is not to serve the will of the people, but to conform the behavior of the people to the will of the government.

“The same thing appears to be the case in Australia, Canada, the UK, and Europe.  For example, in the UK, 99% of the people are opposed to fracking, but the government has ignored the people and permits fracking to take place under the homes of people without their consent.

“In the West, I think that the idea of democracy is dead.  Democracy is no longer a respected value.  Elections serve as a cloak to mask the death of democracy.”

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/01-10-2014/128658-american_history_exceptionalism-0/