Moodys Report Blasts China Solvency


by Staff Report

Here comes Moody’s with a blockbuster which may put China’s “White Knight” status, at least as far as Europe is concerned, in grave danger. In a report just released, the rating agency not only warns that China’s debt problem is “bigger than stated” (i.e., China is hiding a ton of ugly stuff off the books), but goes ahead to quantify it: “Of the RMB 10.7 trillion (about $1.6 trillion) of local government debt examined by the Chinese audit agency, RMB 8.5 trillion ($1.3 trillion) was funded by banks. However, Moody’s has identified another potential RMB 3.5 trillion ($540 billion) of such loans that the Chinese auditors did not discuss in their report….we find that the Chinese audit agency could be understating banks’ exposures to local governments by as much as RMB 3.5 trillion.” – ZeroHedge

Dominant Social Theme: China has done a splendid job of turning a communist system into a free-market one. Its prosperity is a result. Just look at the numbers.

Free-Market Analysis: Tyler Durden at the popular ZeroHedge website just came out with an article regarding the untrustworthiness of China’s financial numbers (see excerpt above). It’s taken from a Moody’s release that has found nearly US$1.5 trillion of Chinese loans may be under water. This corresponds to what we’ve been reporting (with increasing urgency) over the past two years. You can see our most recent article here, The Coming Chinese Depression. Below is an excerpt from what we wrote:

Of course, the success in our view has been initiated by printing fiat dollars – money from nothing. It is the same “success” that the Western central banks had prior to 2008 and look at how that ended. One cannot grow an economy year after year at nine percent per quarter and expect anything at the end of it but an inflationary depression. Chinese economic statistics are a case of “garbage in and garbage out.” And Western power elitesmust be quite aware of what is going to happen in China eventually. In our view it is a kind journalistic criminality that the mainstream media does not do more to alert the West about what is in store. When the Chinese economy crashes, the rest of the world will not be immune.

How did we know Chinese numbers were junk even before the latest startling revelations? Because China is currently the world’s biggest “planned” economy and government numbers ALWAYS lie. China’s Western public perception is built on the lie that its communist masters have suddenly become capitalist converts. They have not.

The Chinese economy at its lower levels is one of competitive vibrancy but at the top of the system, power and control is concentrated as always in the hands of only a few. This is analogous to systems in South America (and increasingly in the West, unfortunately), where the masses are free to sell cell phones to each other for vanishing margins all day long. But the larger entities of control, the banks, power stations and big box merchandising outlets are in the hands of a few powerful families, many of them with connections to Anglosphere elites.

It is in fact a kind of dominant social theme – that capitalism has won the day in China and its billions are converts tofree-market thinking. They are not. The purpose of proposing this meme in our view is to reinforce the kind of structure that the ChiComs have developed.

If China is seen as a “capitalist” success, then its system is worth emulating. And it is a most authoritarian system. It is one in which a handful of basically unelected, powerful men are gathered together under a stated (incomprehensible) ideology to use the levers of government power to enrich themselves and others around them.

It is a mafia-like approach to the markets. Government generally IS mafia like. It extracts protection money (taxes) to keep people safe from non-existent threats. As threats are not available, those in government usually make them up.

What is not often understood is that one’s own government is culpable but so is the government on the other side. The ruling classes inevitably have more in common with each other than they do with the ruled. China’s command-and-control economy is most attractive to Western elites that are continually undermining what is left of the West’s free-market structure and intellectual history.

Within this context, Western elites and the mainstream media they control have every incentive to cover up the real nature of the Chinese economy for as long as they can. It is something of a propaganda effort. The idea is to instill in people around the world the idea that a command-and-control economy run by a few wise men is a viable and preferable sociopolitical circumstance.

The Moody’s China release and Tyler Durden’s following commentary provide us with an antidote. Durden believes the rating agencies have found “religion” after being so spectacularly wrong about the economic crisis of 2008 when almost every blue-chip banking entity foundered and fell.

“Of China’s $5.8 trillion GDP,” Durden writes, “(or whatever imaginary number the Polit Bureau is happy with throwing around for mass consumption), $540 billion is debt that is ‘unaccounted for’, most likely due to being, well, bad.”

Durden also puts it in a US context. “That would be equivalent to saying that $1.4 trillion of US corporate debt is delinquent. And lest anything is lost in translation, Moody’s drives the stake through the Dragon’s heart: ‘Since these loans to local governments are not covered by the NAO report, this means they are not considered by the audit agency as real claims on local governments.'”

And what does that mean? “This indicates that these loans are most likely poorly documented and may pose the greatest risk of delinquency. So let’s get this straight: a country which has 10% of its GDP in the form of bad debt, is somehow expected to be credible enough to buy not only Greek debt, but the EURUSD each and every day? Mmmmk.”

As we have pointed out many times and with increasingly elevated volume, the Chinese system at the top, where it counts, is a sham. It is a promotion that is being run for a number of reasons, and the Western elites are seemingly complicit.

China is increasingly cast as an enemy of the West, but this is a fairly ludicrous portrayal. China owns more American debt than any other country; and now it has begun propping up Europe as well. Without active Chinese involvement it is safe to say that both Europe and the US would be in considerably worse circumstances (and that’s saying a lot).

China’s price inflation is stubborn and terrible. Real-estate prices apparently remain basically out-of-control. Prices for basic food items have appreciated dramatically. There is considerable civil unrest now, across the entire country,. though China continually covers it up and the Western mainstream media (of course) does not cover it.

The full weight of Chinese mendacity as regards its economy came clear with its building of so many empty cities, its many empty 10-lane highways and its trans-continental high-speed rail system (now cancelled). The many empty cities are being built, from what we can tell, to “house” excess Chinese population; actually they satisfy the economic goals of local officials who dread missing the economic growth targets that the politburo has set.

On the most mundane level, we think the Chinese promotion was supposed to act like Western ones, drawing in Western cash and resources to enrich the pockets of those behind them. Perhaps the downturn, whenever it comes, is supposed to further increase the grip of the Chinese communist party.

We’ve often predicted that a Chinese recession/depression will have exactly the opposite effect and may put an end to the current system, though whether it will result in a more energetic free-market system is certainly an open question.

None of the Chinese growth and inflation numbers can be counted on at this point. Inherent in Chinese culture is the need to “save face” and with a boom that has been going on as long as this one, we can only imagine the amount of lies that have been told.

The other day, we pointed out that Western mainstream media is complicit in the meme of the Chinese miracle. Sad to say, the Moody’s release did not receive a great deal of play outside of the alternative media. This is in line with what we expected.

At this point, the great Chinese expansion is evidently and obviously a kind of dominant social theme propounded by both Chinese and American elites. The two systems seem increasingly intertwined, with China propping up both America and the European Union.

What’s going on in China doesn’t seem logical, nor does the mainstream media’s response, which still for the most part seems to revolve around a deafening silence. If-and-when the West is blindsided by a Chinese “hard landing,” the results around the world will likely be seen as catastrophic.

The Moody’s report is just one more piece of evidence that shows us just how questionable and over-optimistic the Chinese story really is. Much of what is reported about China in the West’s mainstream press is a kind of fantasy based on over-stimulation of China’s economy with torrents of paper money.

Conclusion: China – the entire continent it seems – is in the grip of a gigantic growth bubble. Tomorrow’s reality may see that bubble punctured, and the Moody’s report is certainly a needle. Likely, it will not be the only one.


The Essential Rules Of Liberty


By Brandon Smith

There is nothing worse in this world than an enslaved man who naively believes himself free, except, perhaps, trying to explain to that same man his predicament. You can lay truth after truth before his feet. You can qualify your every position with cold hard irrefutable data. You can plead and scream and raise veritable hell, but before he will ever listen, he must first become aware of his own dire circumstances. As long as he views himself as “safe and secure”, as long as he imagines his chains to be wings, he will see no reason to question the validity of the world around him, and he will certainly never invest himself into changing his own deluded destiny.

Unfortunately, there are many such men crawling and scraping about here in what was once a land graced with a self sufficient and independently minded public majority. The great lie that has been perpetuated in this country over the past several decades is that we can defer our responsibilities of vigilance and place our well being and our futures into the hands of others for the sake of “collective efficiency”, or leisure. We have been conditioned to live in a state of constant indifference, a society which prizes compromise over principle and steadfast resolve. Those who refuse to compromise that which is honorable for the sake of ease and comfort are indicted as “extremist” or even criminal. The idea of personal revolution is treated with discomfort, and all we claim to stand for becomes muddled in a fog of inaction and cynicism. As Americans, we have forgotten what it means to earn and protect our own freedoms. We have forgotten that in liberty, there are standards that must be defended.

This, however, does not mean we cannot yet again remember ourselves. The desire for freedom is as inborn and natural as our own heartbeat, as our own breath. It is instinct. It cannot be erased from within, only oppressed from without. The tide has always been against tyranny, always, though we may find that hard to believe. If liberty was not ingrained into our very DNA, humanity would have succumbed to bondage and self destructed long ago. This is not the case. Stretching under the surface of our superficial force-fed mainstream culture are the roots of something real, and honest. Simmering beneath our so called “civilized” veneer, many Americans are finally rediscovering their wild and defiant origins. In the recent past we have been taught to feel ashamed of our rebelliousness. Now, we are learning to hold it quite dear.

For those of us who are awake, and for those who are on the verge of understanding, certain rules come into play that strengthen our stance and shield us from folly. Liberty is not a self perpetuating social condition. It requires guidelines, and effort, and sacrifice. Liberty will not survive without our willingness to maintain it. If you are not ready and willing to fight for your own independence, then you are not truly free.

Let’s examine some of the inherent laws and guidelines of free will and free action that will allow us to not only win back our self determination, but to keep it for generations to come. You want liberty? This is what it takes…

Rule #1: Never Take Anything For Granted

A lot of people today seem to have serious issues with expectation and assumption; what we in the alternative media often refer to as “normalcy bias”. We have grown used to the idea of abundance and relative safety. So much so, that we fail to notice when our abundance and safety begin to disappear.We assume that the condition of the world today will be the condition of the world tomorrow, and for all time. In the U.S., we have even come to expect not only that our prosperity and our freedom are inevitable, but that they will also increase exponentially with each passing generation. This is a relatively new and narrow cultural mindset likely caused by the explosion in industrial growth after WWII which seemed to erase all memory of the Great Depression in our society, leaving us with the belief that surely, our circumstances would never become so desperate again.

Those who are truly independent realize that nations, no matter how affluent, can self destruct at a moment’s notice, especially when they fail to recognize their own weaknesses and confront their own demons. Never suppose that that which is good and just will remain without your own initiative. Never wait for others to fix those problems which you could just as easily solve yourself. Never expect that freedoms won cannot also be easily lost. Always prepare for the worst outcome, and strive for the best outcome.

Rule #2: Educate Yourself

Never become a useful idiot, or a waste of oxygen. Being a part of the herd is nothing to be proud of.Strive for knowledge, and thirst for the truth every moment of every day. Many of the things we deem “important” in modern society are in the grand scheme hollow attempts to fill our lives with distraction, only wasting time until we finally bite the dust filled with regret. Pretending to further the depth of one’s life is not the same as actually doing so. I can’t think of anything more horrifying than becoming a man who rushes around frantically every waking moment, but ultimately accomplishes nothing.

Do not assume that you already have a tangible grasp of the truth, especially if all your knowledge has been handed to you. Instead, research that knowledge for yourself. Put that which you have been taught to the test. Only in this way will you finally learn. Expand your horizons. Learn something useful.Remove unnecessary distractions for at least part of your day and focus on increasing your awareness of the environment you live in. There are very few things in this world more important than this, and self education should take precedence over everything else except your family. “Lack of time” is no excuse for ignorance. Make time! The ignorant are led. The knowledgeable lead themselves.

Rule #3: Don’t Be A Pansy

Liberty is not for the faint of heart. Emotional courage is paramount to freedom, and it can be expressed to incredible effect by even the most unlikely heroes. I’ve seen children with more courage and tenacity than some full grown men.

If one recognizes the gravity of the situation we face as a people, if one understands the considerable danger involved in the fall of a Republic to the depths of fear and autocracy, but still does nothing, that person has not only failed the world, he has also failed himself. “Making waves”, or drawing the ire of “authority”, is the least of our worries. If you have utilized an objective eye, and know you are right in your position, then there is no reason to fear criticism from anyone.

Sociopolitical action, nonconformity, noncompliance, and self defense, are unavoidable aspects of a society that wishes to maintain its freedoms. There is no way around it. If you are not willing to stick your neck out and expose yourself to risk, you remove all chance of possible gain. If you are a self proclaimed activist that refuses to sacrifice, that refuses to struggle, then you have failed before you even began. Talk must lead to balanced action. Never thumb your nose at the devil without being ready to trade punches as well, or all is lost.

Rule #4: Stop Waiting For Others To Tell You What To Do

Independent people not only consider and implement the solutions of others, they also work on their own. Complaints abound lately in the Liberty Movement;

“When is someone going to do something!? What are YOU going to do about our predicament!?”

This is the question of a slave, not a free man. A free man asks, “What am I going to do about this predicament? What is MY solution to the problem?” Therein is the key to liberty; decentralized leadership and movements based on fluidity and spontaneity of action, instead of a great mass of people standing around stiffly waiting for orders on high, or a self styled messiah to engineer their world view. As soon as you place your very initiative under the control of others, you have lost the fight.Always consider the solid strategies of intelligent people, and adopt them if they are useful, but do not remain idle because you are too frightened to exert the effort to solve problems bigger than yourself.Spectators only witness history, they do not make history.

Rule #5: Cast Off What Is Unnecessary, Keep What Is Effective

Yes, I stole this rule from Bruce Lee, but it is just as applicable to social movements and economic stability as it is to the martial arts. Invasive debt creation, for instance, is a tool for subversion, and no people forced to bear the burden of liabilities they can never repay is free. Therefore, exorbitant debt must be avoided, or cast off completely.

In our personal lives, how many useless goods do we accumulate on a daily basis, instead of useful items that we may one day desperately need? How much of our life is spent accumulating garbage in order to keep up with “socially acceptable” levels of consumer behavior? How many of us cling to careers we hate in order to service our needless consumption? The ability to prioritize must become a virtue once again, and, we all need to shut off the cable television…

This rule also applies to governments. If a government no longer fulfills its sworn duties to the people, and no longer serves the purposes to which it was originally intended, then it too must be cast off and replaced with one that does serve the people, or, it must be forced to return to its inherent foundations.Today, this kind of talk is often referred to as “extremism”, or insurgency, no matter how correct it might be, which brings us to our next rule…

Rule #6: Ignore Establishment Labels

Tactical name calling is only effective if we actually care what other people think of us. Labels like “homegrown terrorist”, “extremist”, “doomer”, or “conspiracy theorist”, are designed to shame people into self censorship. That is to say, they pigeonhole movements and their participants into categories of public shame, causing said movements to fear social reprisal. They are also meant to forcefully assign “outsider” or “fringe” status to particular political positions in order to marginalize and weaken the resolve of those who hold them. Never mind that almost every powerful and honorable cultural movement in history once started out as “fringe”.

Early in our lives, we are taught that it is far better to be accepted, and to avoid standing out, even at the expense of our individualism. Unfortunately, many adults never outgrow this childish belief, and thus become vulnerable to tactics as absurd as simple ridicule. At bottom, being slandered by a thieving bureaucracy infested with soulless parasites bent on centralization at the expense of innocent human life is a bit laughable (this goes for you too, SPLC). Globalists, along with their media cronies and their think-tank sock puppets, will say ANYTHING to get what they want. Empty words and false labels cannot stop the truth, or a movement driven by the truth.

Rule #7: Cynicism Is The Path To Defeat

It is good to be critical, but not to the point of nihilism. America’s past is riddled with mistakes, bad judgments, horrible crimes, and downright stupidity; that doesn’t mean that the principles on which this country was founded are any less vital. We hear often from cynics that humanity has become too stupid and complacent to do what is right. However, stupidity and complacency are not inherent qualities. That’s an elitist fantasy with no basis in fact. Stupidity and complacency are learned behaviors, and they can be unlearned. What IS inherent is our ability to choose what path we will take.For adherents of liberty, we need only remind people that they have this choice. We can whine and cry all day long about how nobody pays attention and how there is no hope, or, we can exhaust all options before throwing in the proverbial towel. We don’t need to “like” society the way it is, but we do need to recognize the underlying potential of all people to become something much more than what they currently are (I can’t stand blind ignorance either, but I’m certainly not ready to accept it as a fact of American life). Remember, no fight is over until it is over.

Rule #8: True Authority Is Derived From Respect That Is Earned, Not Bought, Or Taken

A corrupt politician is just a criminal conman in a nice suit. A law enforcement officer who refuses to follow Constitutional Law is just a petty little tyrant in a black uniform. An economist who knowingly skews data to fit his own political bias or to serve the political biases of men above him is just a liar or an inept buffoon with an embossed piece of paper from an expensive university. A lab scientist or doctor who flubs experimentation to support the interests of the corporate world rather than the needs of the public is just a quack in a white coat. All too often, though, we find ourselves taking these cretins seriously all because they talk the talk and wear the costume. They are just people, and if they cannot do their jobs honestly, then they are useless people, who deserve our disdain, not our respect. We should never allow such men to wield positions of authority over us.

Rule #9: Take It Personally

When someone tries to steal from you, hurt you, or enslave you, unless you are some kind of nut, you take it pretty personally, right? Why should it be any different when a government commits the same grievances? Americans should be furious over the destruction of their economy, their currency, their infrastructure, and their Constitutional freedoms! They should be enraged over the endless wars overseas that are bankrupting the nation. They should be bellowing to the rooftops over the cooption of their political system by a slimy brood of corporate bankers. Is this “extremist” behavior? Who cares!?If your anger is not visible then it is not worth a damn. Don’t just get active, get emotional! This is about your life, and the lives of those you love. That’s not to say that we should take out our frustrations randomly and haphazardly, but if we can’t at least make known our anger over the misdeeds of government, then what the hell is the point of calling ourselves free?

Rule #10: You Are The First And Last Line Of Defense

Like it our not, this is our job. We have inherited a country on the verge of disaster, and we are tasked with cleaning it up, otherwise, there will be little left to pass on. We do not get to bask in illusory prosperity for the rest of our days. We do not get to feed off the entitlement program trough until we are fat and contented. We are not going to retain our rights without blood, sweat, and tears. We will not be building magical floating cities in the clouds or skyscrapers on Mars. We will NOT be remembered fondly as members of some fantastical “golden era”.

We have been thrust into the muck and the mire. We are being molded as the lost children of an age better forgotten. We have been slapped in the face with a dilemma so volatile and so incredible it may one day be called the greatest crisis of all time. We have drawn the short straw.

This could be viewed as some terrible doom. It could be held as a star crossed act of ferocious fate.We could fall to our knees and lament with despair, overcome with woe at our unbearable lot. But, this would be in violation of rule #3, and nobody wants to be a sobbing pansy. On the contrary, every “bad luck generation” is only so if they refuse to see the great fortune at their fingertips; if they refuse to seize the moment and conquer the giants of their day. The greater the hardship, the greater the enemy, the greater the heroes. We are faced with possibly the most unrelenting antagonists and the most treacherous obstacles in recent memory, or even distant memory. In the same spark of confrontation, we are also presented with unparalleled opportunity to change the course of the world forever. Whether or not we succeed, is entirely up to us.

You can contact Brandon Smith at:

Join Alt-Market today, find a barter network in your area, or start your own. Insulate yourself and your family from economic collapse before it is too late.

The Declaration of Independence For Secessionists



The Declaration of Independence For Secessionists


Clearly Mr. Longcore is among the kind of men needed to lead a new State, and help construct a new form of government. He may not be a Thomas Jefferson, but he is close enough to get my vote, which would be a new experience for me, as I have never, and will never, vote in this present tyrannical system.


July 3, 2011

By Thomas Jefferson and Russell D. Longcore

(Editor’s Note: First posted in 2009, this article is one of my most requested articles.)

I recently began contemplating the imminent collapse of the US Federal Government. In light of the insane, unconstitutional spending of the Congress and Presidents (Bush and Obama will spend the same ways), the recession/depression that the nation is presently experiencing, and the simultaneous devaluation and inflation of the nation’s currency, collapse is the only consequence that makes sense.

Ask the Soviet Union. Oh…excuse me…they’re gone! The USSR collapsed from identical causes in 1991, and the Soviet states once again became sovereign nations.

So, what will individuals and states do? Will they preemptively forsake the Union, or wait to react once the Federal Government collapses? Common sense should dictate the serious debate of secession prior to collapse. However, I do remember that the legislatures of the States are filled with politicians. Reaction seems more likely than forward planning, especially from those who have long suckled at the Federal teat.

I took the original Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson, and added wording to customize it for the present day. Please read it carefully and contemplate its meaning and its ramifications. My new version still needs more work, but it is a place to start.


When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for a people to dissolve the political and governmental institutions under which they have governed themselves, and institute new government deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the institution of the new form of government.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their liberty, safety and happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these free citizens and sovereign states; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present United States Federal Government is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these free citizens and sovereign states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

In 1861, the United States declared war upon the Confederate States of America, a confederation of sovereign states that lawfully seceded from the Union and formed a government to provide new guards for their future security. The CSA was defeated in that war by the armies of the United States and the Union was unlawfully maintained:

The US Federal Government has enacted unconstitutional laws and authorized unconstitutional spending and the creation and funding of unconstitutional Federal agencies. It has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance. It has imposed taxes on us without our consent:

The US Federal Government has borrowed so many trillions of dollars that the amount can never be repaid.

The US Federal Government created the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Agency, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and the Homeland Security Administration, which are unconstitutional usurpations of the powers of the people and the states guaranteed in the 10th Amendment:

The US Federal Government created the Transportation Security Administration, which is a clear violation of the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution. The actions of the TSA violate the 4th Amendment, which protects citizens from illegal search and seizure without warrant based upon probable cause:

The US Federal Government created the Internal Revenue Service to enforce the gigantic Federal Income Tax Code, violating Article I of the Constitution:

The US Federal Government has violated Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution in which Congress may raise and support an army, but no appropriation to that use shall be more than two years. The US Federal Government has established hundreds of military bases on American soil, quartering large bodies of armed troops among us, violating the 3rdAmendment. Additionally, it has established over one hundred military bases in other sovereign nations around the world:

The US Federal Government is at this time retaining large armies of domestic and foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the lawful government of a civilized nation:

The US Federal Government has deprived certain individuals of the benefits of trial by jury by transporting certain individuals beyond seas to be jailed and tortured for pretended offenses, violating the principle of Habeas Corpus and the 5th Amendment of the Constitution:

The US Federal Government has enacted laws infringing upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms, an overt violation of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution:

The US Federal Government, through enacting the Patriot Act of 2001, has violated the 4th Amendment’s strictures on privacy and protection against illegal search and seizure. It has violated the 5th Amendment guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law:

The US Federal Government, through enacting the Patriot Act of 2001, has violated the 6th Amendment guarantees that in criminal prosecutions, the accused shall the right to a speedy and public trial, be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, and be confronted by the witnesses against him:

The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, signed on May 9, 2007, places all governmental power in the hands of the President and effectively abolishes the checks and balances in the Constitution:

The US Federal Government established the Federal Reserve, a consortium of private banks, to manage and manipulate the currency of the United States. This violates Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution which provides Congress authority to coin money and regulate its value. The Federal Reserve is unconstitutional:

The Federal Reserve has created massive inflation since its inception in 1913 by issuing paper money that has no underlying value in gold and silver. Because of the attempts of the Federal Reserve to manipulate the American economy, it created an abnormal cycle of boom and recession:

In 2008, the US Federal Government approved trillion-dollar financial bailouts to financial institutions and private companies, a clear violation of Article I, Section 8 and the 10th Amendment of the Constitution:

The US Federal Government has prosecuted unlawful and unconstitutional wars, including wars in Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Bosnia, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan, violating Article I, Section 8, which grants the power to declare war only to Congress:

The US Federal Government created the Social Security Administration in 1935, a clear violation of the Article I, Section 8, and the 10th Amendment:

The US Federal Government, though its Judicial Branch, has altered legislation and created law, in violation of Article III of the Constitution:

The US Federal Government has obligated the United States to membership in the United Nations, and combined with other nations to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and superior by treaty to our laws; giving its assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

The US Federal Government has usurped the powers reserved to the States in the 10th Amendment as it relates to immigration and naturalization. It has obstructed the laws for naturalization of foreigners, refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and altered the conditions of lawful immigration of foreign persons:

The US Federal Government has altered fundamentally the forms of our government guaranteed to the free citizens and states by the Constitution of the united States of America.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. An institution of government, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define tyranny, is unfit to be the designated and chosen government of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Branches of the United States Federal Government. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their actions to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common citizenship to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt the quiet enjoyment of our citizenship and liberty. They have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the free citizens of the several, sovereign and united States of America, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do solemnly publish and declare, that these States are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the presently established United States Federal Government, and that all political connection between them and the United States Federal Government, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent States, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do. The free citizens of the several, sovereign states reject and absolve themselves from any and all bonds between themselves and any other sovereign state under the Constitution of the United States. Those free citizens and their representatives in the sovereign States do now and should immediately cease collecting and forwarding all Federal taxes, tariffs or fees of any and every kind to the United States Federal Government.

And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.





By James P. Harvey (aka OldDog)

One can safely assume that in many cases rage and murder our joined at the hip, and in some cases, the reason for the rage provides justification for the murder. In other cases, murder is committed with no rage at all, just a cold calculation that it will result in profit of some kind. Without the moral roadblock of Christianity the traffic in murder becomes epidemic. One needs only to read the daily paper to confirm this statement.

As I write this the United States Government is killing thousands of people under the orders of their Banker masters for no other reason than monetary profit, and has been since the get go. Yet we peons celebrate these atrocities as if it was the direct instructions of God. So much for, “Thou shalt not kill”.

If you counter that God has instructed past leaders to kill, and sometimes in the most barbaric fashion, you would be correct, but to assume that God is talking directly to any of Americas leaders is really stretching cognition to the breaking point.

What has contributed to this acceptance of government murder among the peons, besides a lifetime association with murder as entertainment? One can only wonder how Americans can dare show their face in worship, while consistently supporting murderers in government. One can also wonder how any preacher can be theologically obtuse enough to fan the flames of government murder.

Unless someone has committed an atrocity that begets rage, and the evidence is unmistakable, I contend that absent direct orders from God, there is no justification for murder, and even what appears to be unmistakable evidence, or direct orders from God, must be thoroughly examined.

This is why God established governments among men, so that truth will prevail, and justice be served. What kind of lunatic would justify a government that murders for profit, even when the supporting majority is intellectually underdeveloped? Has humanity lost the basic instinct of compassion? Have American’s lost all common sense?

Did Jesus say “go and spread democracy over the whole earth? IT DOESN’T IN MY BIBLE’S, and I have all the translations. So, any Christian acceptance of government murder is lacking any biblical support, and only government manipulated RAGE must be the cause of Christian involvement.

This can only mean that American’s are intellectually incapable of inspecting the evidence, or there is evil in their soul, and probably both. Another great tragedy that confounds me is, why do Americans, especially Christians need some National Hero to serve as their leader? What is wrong with being served by an intellectually superior group of History scholars? Erudite Men and Women who can articulate lessons learned from history, and present alternatives to those mistakes of past governments. Why have American’s not demanded that all government leaders must first publish their comprehension of the laws and morals they will adhere to? Since the oath of office has become meaningless, why don’t we insist that all government leaders sign a contractual oath of performance, with clearly defined objectives, rewards, and penalties? If a man or woman cannot clearly articulate in writing and speaking how they perceive the Nation’s needs, and also clearly explain their proposed solutions to Problems, why would any thinking person support them? I conclude that America is sorely short of thinkers, and has a pandemic of self-serving ignoramuses’.

One can also construct a convincing argument that the learning disabilities so prevalent in America are the result of government planning. Ignorant people are so much easier to manage and control. But then again, what kind of intelligence is needed to perceive danger? Do people need to be educated to perceive personal danger, or is it a natural intellectual attribute? If people who borrow money from a loan shark with no intension of paying the debt need an education to prevent that mistake, then God help us. If people need an education to prevent them from strolling on a busy interstate highway, then God help them. What the hell has happened to the American comprehension of danger? Continuing to support this federal rogue government is ludicrous!

We have abandoned God, logic, and common sense in our pursuit of profit.

Money is not the only, or even a justified objective of labor, investment, or any other pursuit. Personal safety is, or should be our instinctual objective.

Now back to RAGE, and its necessity for justification of murder.

Can any learned person object to the murder of all of the international bankers, when their exploits are so well documented? Does their exploits not justify Rage? Where is there a Grand Jury that will investigate the banker’s atrocities and indict them for crimes against humanity? There is no other group of people in all of history more deserving of murder than these scumbags, and the entire population of America is sitting on their ass and allowing it to escalate. With each passing second we the people are being murdered by this evil leviathan called central banking. Its monstrosities are legendary and the most putrid example of human action. Yet, where is the cry for revenge? Where is the person who will stand up and shout “YOU ARE FOUL AND DESERVING OF DEATH“?Even Present Kennedy did not have the good sense to construct a grand jury, and instead tried to beat them at their own game and print our own money. Like Lincoln, he paid with his life for that mistake, and the cover-up that followed should have ignited a raging storm of protest, but Americans sat on their ass and accepted the bankers sovereign right to murder. If they can do it, why the hell can’t our government murder them, unless of course our government is controlled by them? Go ahead sheeple, and vote for another hero, and I guarantee you the world will not forget, or forgive our cowardly acceptance of this tyranny. We personally will suffer the consequences of our blind acceptance of these scumbags as our leaders.

Unless a hundred million Americans understand that, and become enraged enough to take action that will result in the International Bankers being indicted, prosecuted, and murdered for their global genocide, then we are the dumbest of humanity and deserving of the coming destruction.

America, the land of the free, and the home of the brave, my ass!


Is the U N stealing control of our water and Republic right out from under us?


 ”IWRM is the (planning) process which promotes the co-ordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems.”


At water rights hearings at the Nevada Department of Water Resources, farmers and ranchers of Eureka, Nevada seem to be caught between a rock and a hard place.  Several articles have been written about their plight (links below).

But it seems like something “bigger” is happening.  It is, and it’s probably happening to you, too.

After the most recent hearing, I saw a flyer on a bulletin board in the hallway.  On it, the American Water Resources Association (AWRA) described a conference about Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM).  The flyer linked IWRM to the Global Water Partnership and the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.

Does this sound as “American” as apple pie to you?  Or does it sound multi-national and make you wonder how this might relate not only to our water rights, but to our constitutional rights here in the U.S.A.?

The conference aims were to explore IWRM in detail from both “US and international perspectives” and ask questions like “Can the USA implement IWRM?” and “How can IWRM best be implemented?”

However, the bigger question should be, do you want your property (and our United States) to be governed by  international laws?


On the AWRA website, it states “Participants in the national collaboration process spearheaded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers defined IWRM in this manner: ‘IWRM aims to develop and manage water, land, and related resources, while considering multiple viewpoints of how water should be managed (i.e. planned, designed and constructed, managed, evaluated, and regulated). It is a goal-directed process for controlling the development and use of river, lake, ocean, wetland, and other water assets in ways that integrate and balance stakeholder interests, objectives, and desired outcomes across levels of governance and water sectors for the sustainable use of the earth’s resources’.” 

So, it’s also about managing the land and “related resources?”  Does this mean ALL land and ALL resources?  And who exactly will be offering the “multiple viewpoints” that IWRM aims to consider while CONTROLLING the development and use of river, lake, ocean, wetland and other water assets?  Who are the stakeholders?  Does the “stakeholder” group include PROPERTY OWNERS?  What exactly are the “desired outcomes” of earth’s resources and who is desiring these outcomes?

Whatever it is, IWRM wants everybody to do it:  The American Water Resources Association calls on policy makers, planners and managers at national, tribal, interstate, state and local levels to encourage collaborations, policies, programs and plans that embrace Integrated Water Resources Management.”

February, 2010, Secretary of the Department of the Interior, Ken Salazar, (the BP disaster in the Gulf happened with his oversight) signed an Executive Order establishing a water sustainability strategy for the United States calledWaterSMART.

What a coincidence!  The United Nations has a WaterSMART campaign, and this campaign includes Integrated Water Resources Management.

Doesn’t this seem like something that should’ve been run by Congress before Salazar just declared it a policy?  Our tax dollars are paying for U.N. programs to be implemented in the United States.  Are we paying for the demise of our Constitution?

A couple of reasons that United Nations programs are dangerous to our Republic is because our U.S. laws could be superceded by international laws, and also because other governments (“members”) and organizations (“partners”) including multi-national corporations (including private water companies) influence and form United Nations policies.


The U.N.’s Agenda 21 (Chapter 38) states: “All agencies of the United Nations system have a key role to play in the implementation of Agenda 21.”

It seems that while Americans debate whether global warming and climate change are real or not, and while the U.N. fools people into believing its programs are about protecting the environment, there is one fact that is true for all Americans: Michael Shaw of notes that the U.N. programs are about individual rights vs. community rights.  The U.S. Declaration of Independence protects the unalienable rights of each individual, but the U.N Declaration of Human Rights states that “Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations…”


One of the most important organizations to watch is ICLEI (also called Local Governments for Sustainability), established at the U.N.  It’s an international association of local governments pushing U.N.’s Agenda 21 (also called Local 21) into many U.S. local governments.  ICLEI has a water program.  In Nevada, ICLEI USA members include Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, Clark County and Washoe County.   ICLEI has “Cool Mayors.”  In fact, the mayor of Las Vegas is on the Board of Directors of ICLEI USA.  Do you think this is “cool” or do you think this is unconstitutional?

On ICLEI’s website, it states that its International Goals are to promote:

Do you think the “Cool Mayors” have read all of the documents relating to all of this?


You might also want to keep an eye on whatever the Army Corps of Engineers is spearheading.  The U.S. Army Engineer Institute for Water Resources has aMemorandum of Understanding with the Global Water Partnership.

The Sept. 12, 2008 Federal Register states that Sec. 2031 of Water Resources Development Act of 2007 requires that the Corps use the Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM).  And “There are many definitions of IWRM.  One of the most accepted is that of the Global Water Partnership.  IWRM is the (planning) process which promotes the co-ordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems.”

“Equitable”for whom?  Who would benefit from this “economic and social welfare?”  Could “related resources” be your property?

The U.S. Army  Corps of Engineers is a “COLLABORATING SUPPORTER” and “IN-KIND SPONSOR” of the American Water Resourses Association Conference mentioned in the 3rd paragraph of this article.  This conference issponsored by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) and ICIWaRM (International Center for Integrated Water Resources Management under the auspices of UNESCO).


The Global Water Partnership was founded with the support of the United Nations Development Program and the World Bank, to foster Integrated Water Resources Management


Getting back to Nevada, Jason King, Nevada’s State Engineer, is on the Board of Directors of the Nevada Water Resources Association (a non-profit corporation).  Other Board members include representatives of several mining companies (Barrick, Newmont & Kinross) and the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA).  The Southern Nevada Water Authority will be  presenting aWaterSMART Innovations Conference in Las Vegas in October, 2011.

When I called the Nevada Water Resources Association to ask if it was a subsidiary of or associated with the American Water Resources Association, the woman who answered the phone told me it wasn’t.  But guess what?  If you go to the Nevada Water Resources Association website, they provide a link to the American Water Resources Association (which then leads you back to IWRM and the U.N.).

Nevada Assembly Bill 419 further threatens the water rights of farmers and ranchers by giving the State Engineer even more authority.  Marti Oakley of the PPJ Gazette noted that in A.B. 419, in Section 2, #4: If the State Engineer “believes” the water has been abandoned, he does not have to have evidence or proof.  He can end vested water rights. Sec. 3, #7 (b) “says that even private domestic wells can be targeted if they are using too much water.  Compared to what?  Industrialization?”


About ICLEI and Agenda 21, for excellent articles written by Cassandra Anderson

Read these two (also excellent) articles by Marti Oakley of the PPJ Gazette:

About the farmers and ranchers in Eureka, Nevada:


Nevada A.B. 419 –


Why is Gold Important to the World’s Economy?



Just like the Internet outed the global warmers who were set to run a global CO2 tax scam to siphon wealth for The Chosen again.  The crooks in Washington, unable to get congress to pass such a scheme, are currently trying to force it upon the American public with unconstitutional EPA “regulations” and “laws.”

Hugo Salinas Price Counts the Ways in His Classic Article below this one.

Hugo Salinas Price’s article that compares the gold standard and the creation and preservation of jobs and local production versus a fiat world reserve currency system dominated by one country that uprooted jobs, destroyed local production, and caused devastating trade imbalances is a must read for anyone who wants to understand how the world got to where it is economically.

His article is an accurate picture of how a small group of international bankers control the majority of the world’s wealth from The City —a square mile financial center in the middle of London where money and global economies are manipulated for profit and control—and the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) in Basil, Switzerland, which funds The City’s central banks that print and control national currencies in strategic countries throughout the world, including the U.S..

Both The City and the BIS are sovereign “countries” with their own “laws” and police forces—answerable to no one and no nation.

Both are controlled and owned by the same bankers.

The City’s bankers have the knowledge, financial expertise, experience, and trillions to orchestrate—as they have been doing for decades—the big monetary picture that unfolds in Price’s article.

A couple of minor things that Price doesn’t expand on. One is that Nixon decoupled the dollar from gold and took the U.S. (and by extension, the world) off the gold standard in 1971.  He did that, but in reality was just the person who happened to be President at the time to sign the papers.  Nixon, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), was instructed to do this by the CFR—a U.S. based confederate, like Goldman Sachs, for the Rothschild global financial cabal that’s headquartered in The City.

Price also mentions the “. . . international corporations were forced to find cheap labor in order to compete.”  That was what they told the public, but in reality they coordinated the off-shoring of America’s industry because if you could make a $20 shirt that cost $10 to produce in the U.S. for 50 cents in China, and sell it back to the U.S. for the same $20, your profit handsomely; the millions of American jobs associated with the manufacture of that shirt and similar goods such as television sets and computers be damned. America’s unemployment—somewhere north of 15 million with no hope of getting better—is in reality beyond 22 % . The 9% number bantered about by government shills is a lie.

No, the multi-national corporations had their sights first on Mexico, then on Chinaand Bangladeshand other slave labor “resources” way back. That’s why they set about writing laws for their paid congress to pass, such as the removal of U.S. tariffs (which previously protected them from the 50 cent foreign shirt makers) before they began shipping their key manufacturing operations to overseas sweat shops “. . .in order to compete.”

In his essay, Salinas Price talks about the monetary schemes that have been set in motion as a result of all this, their effects on the world’s economy, and their relationship to the gold standard.

The City established banking and financial operations in theU.S.because the dollar was set up to be the reserve currency for nations following WWII (which the London bankers had financed—both sides), with the gold standard as the dollar’s anchor.

These international bankers were already planning then how to use the dollar—through the U.S. Fed (America’s central bank) which they also own—at no cost to themselves, collect interest on the dollars they sold to the U.S. through the Fed, and use the dollar to literally put nations in financial double binds with their dollar-funded IMF and World Bank.

The bankers approached corrupt politicians in these nations to put up their country’s resources as collateral to bail themselves out of their own spending orgies, and from which there is no financial escape once the financial trap is sprung.  Upon default of their IMF/World bank loans, the bankers simply take control the country’s resources (collateral)—toll roads, food, fiber, water, minerals, mines, manufacturing facilities, banks. In this manner, The City has, over the last century, gained financial control of nations.

Currently, this classic financial gambit is underway worldwide, and is most visible in Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the U.S., and Middle East countries that have (or had) their own central banks independent of The City’s. These banksters also attempted to bankrupt and “claim” Iceland, but the Icelandic people bowed their necks, threw the bankers out, and started sending local bankers responsible for the country’s deliberate bankruptcy to prison.

Imagine that.

By the international banking cabal’s strategic log, it appears it’s time to take the dollar and U.S. Constitution down to make way for their appointed world government and currency.

Which they plan to control.

Salinas Price lays out their strategic currency plan to accomplish this.

But. . .there’s this thing called the Internet and its instant disbursement of knowledge to humanity.  All along this information superhighway there lies wreckage of the international bankers’ attempts to pull the wool over the public’s eyes as to their true intentions.  It has shined—is shinning—a light on these psychopathic bilge rats that create “wars” for profit and plunge humanity into economic abysses to enrich themselves.

No,  they’ve been outed; just like Internet outed the global warmers who were set to run a global CO2 tax scam to siphon wealth for The Chosen again.  The crooks in Washington, unable to get congress to pass such a scheme, are currently trying to force it upon the American public with unconstitutional EPA “regulations” and “laws.”

If the financial Wizards of Oz who operate behind the curtain can somehow neutralize the Internet, they’re home free.

If they fail, they may find themselves looking for asylum—if they can find a country that will take them.

Read the article (Master Piece) by Hugo Salinas Price below.

The gold standard: generator and protector of jobs



By Hugo Salinas Price

The abandonment of the gold standard in 1971 is closely tied to the massive unemployment the industrialized world has suffered in recent years; Mexico, even with a lower level of industrialization than the developed countries, has also lost jobs due to the closing of industries; in recent years, the creation of new jobs in productive activities has been anemic at best.

The world’s financial press, in which leading economists and analysts publish their work, never examines the relationship between the abandonment of the gold standard and unemployment, de-industrialization, and the huge chronic export deficits of the Western world powers. Might it be due to ignorance? We are reluctant to think so, given that the articles appearing in the world’s leading financial publications are written by quite intelligent analysts. Rather, in our opinion, it is an act of self-censorship to avoid incurring the displeasure of the important financial and geopolitical interests that are behind the financial press.

In this article we discuss the relationship between loss of the gold standard and the present financial chaos, which is accompanied by severe “structural imbalances” between the historically dominant industrial powers and their new rivals in Asia.

World trade before 1971

From the end of World War II through the 1960s, all well-governed nations in the world sought to maintain a constant balance between their exports and imports. They all wanted to maintain a situation where they exported more than they imported, so that they could accumulate growing Treasury reserves of gold, or in its defect dollars, which, under the terms of the United States (US) promise in the Bretton Woods Agreements of 1944, could be redeemed by any Central Bank that requested gold in exchange for its dollars.

To be precise, we cannot fail to mention one exception. The exception to the rule was none other than the US. All well-governed countries sought to export more than they imported, except the US.

The US was not overly concerned with maintaining a balance between exports and imports, because – according to Bretton Woods – the US could pay its export deficits by the simple expedient of sending more dollars to pay its creditors. As the sole source of dollars, the US had a clear advantage over the rest of the world; they could pay their debts in (redeemable) dollars that they themselves printed.

Economists of the day warned of the danger of this practice, which resulted in a constant loss of American gold. From over 20,000 tons at the end of World War II, US gold reserves dropped year by year as certain countries, notably France, insisted on redeeming their dollars for gold at a rate of 35 dollars per ounce of gold. France incurred intense displeasure in Washington and New York due to its demands for gold in exchange for dollars; some analysts attribute the unrest in France in the spring of 1968 to covert operations by the US intelligence services, in a show of America’s disapproval of the behavior of France, led at the time by General Charles de Gaulle.

The US did nothing to slow the loss of gold. In the early months of 1971, Henry Hazlitt, a solid classical economist, predicted that the dollar would have to be devalued; he said it would be necessary to increase the number of dollars that would be needed to obtain an ounce of gold from the United States Treasury. Only months after his warning, the dam burst, and in August 1971 the US was forced to devalue its currency, because the amount of gold in its reserves had fallen to a dangerous level. (Today, many doubt that the US has the 8,000 tons of gold it claims to have in its vaults at Fort Knox and the US Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.)

What Henry Hazlitt never imagined was that instead of devaluing the currency – the recommendation of Paul Samuelson, Nobel Prize Winner in Economics, published the week before August 15, 1971 – President Nixon took the advice of Milton Friedman and declared that from that time forward the US would no longer redeem dollars held by the world’s central banks at any price. The US unilaterally violated the terms of Bretton Woods. In effect, it was actually financial bankruptcy.

Since then, all world trade – or most of it, as the euro, the pound sterling, and to a lesser extent the yen all compete with the dollar – is conducted using dollars that are nothing more than fiat money, fake money. Because all the world’s other currencies were bound to gold through the dollar, the immediate consequence was that simultaneously they also became fiat money, fake money with no backing.

Consequences of abandoning the gold standard

The consequences of that fateful day have overthrown all order and harmony in economic relations among the nations of the world, while facilitating and expediting the global expansion of credit because part of the dollars exported by the US ended up in the reserves of Central Banks around the world.

Countries began to accumulate dollars as the expansion of credit in the US advanced inexorably, now free of the restraint formerly imposed by Bretton Woods. The rest of the world was forced to accumulate dollars in reserves, because having insufficient dollar reserves, or having reserves that did not grow, or worse, having falling reserves, was a clear sign for monetary speculators to attack a country’s currency and destroy it with devaluation.

As the loss of gold ceased to be a limiting factor, the last restrictions on the expansion of credit were stripped away. A heavy flow of dollars to all parts of the world spurred the expansion of global credit, which did not stop until 2007. The international banking elite always strive to obtain greater profits and to that end always seek to expand credit. Starting in 1971, freed of the restraint of being required to pay international accounts in gold, or with dollars redeemable for gold, the constant unfettered creation of credit and still more credit ensued. It was boom time in the US.

The US, which paid the rest of the world with its own irredeemable dollars of no intrinsic value, lauded the adoption of “free trade” and “globalization”. The US could buy whatever it wanted, anywhere in the world, in any quantity, and at any price. Starting in the 1990s, its export deficits became alarming, but nothing was done to reduce them; on the contrary, they grew year by year.

Mexico, following the US example, joined NAFTA – the North American Free Trade Association. Down with import tariffs! Free trade with the world! The new vision offered the enthralling, seductive picture of a globalized world without borders, where everyone could buy and sell where they liked, with no limits. The 90’s were years of unbridled optimism for globalization!

Free Trade is unquestionably beneficial for humanity at large. It is good to be able to buy goods where they are cheapest; some countries enjoy conditions that favor them in production of certain things; each country should produce those things in which it has an advantage over other countries. Thus, the whole world can benefit from the good things each country has to offer. It is an appealing and sound doctrine, but… there is a crucial catch: the doctrine of Free Trade was conceived for a world where the sole means of payment was gold. When the doctrines of “Free Trade” and the “Comparative Advantages of Nations” were developed, the economists of the day could not imagine a world that did not use gold, but instead relied on a fiat money that could be created at will by a single country.

The “globalization” of the 1980s and 1990s and to date is based on the ideas of “Free Trade”. However, in the absence of the gold standard that existed when the doctrine was conceived, “globalization” had completely destructive results, which have caused the de-industrialization of the West and the rise to power of Asia.

In the decades prior to 2007 a massive fleet of cargo ships was created, which sailed for the US and Europe – the West in general, Mexico included – bearing all kinds of inexpensive, quality products made  in Asia. The flood was so great that local factories in the Western World were forced to move to Asia, to employ cheaper labor and continue to sell their products in the West.

My readers will know how many industries, large and small, have ceased to exist in the US and the West in general, because Chinese competition killed them. They will know as well how hard it is to find a product that can be produced at a profit in the developed countries. It is very difficult to find a niche for any product to be manufactured locally. The flight of factories to Asia to take advantage of lower wages caused unemployment where local factories were closed. For the same reason job creation is slow or non-existent.

A taxi driver in Barcelona told us: “Spain is a service economy. Industry is no longer our foundation. If tourists stop coming, we’ll die.” By the same token, it has been said of Greece: “It produces olive oil and tourism, and nothing more.” The US, industrial colossus of the post-war world, has been de-industrialized. Now, what are developed countries to do to create jobs?

Diagnosis of the evils of de-industrialization and unemployment

These evils appeared because gold was eliminated as a) a constraint on the expansion of credit and the creation of money, and b) the only form of payment of international debt.

Under the gold standard all players in international trade knew that it was only possible to sell to a country that sold something else in turn. It was not possible to buy from a country that did not buy in turn. Trade was naturally balanced by this restriction. The “structural imbalances” so commonplace today were unheard of.

For example, in 1900, Mexico could export coffee to Germany because Germany, in turn, exported machinery to Mexico. Germany could buy coffee from Mexico because Mexico, in turn, bought machinery from Germany. Each transaction was denominated in gold, and as a result there was a balance based on an economic reality. Because there was balance in world commercial relationships, a relatively small amount of gold sufficed to adjust the international balance. The world financial center which acted as a “Global Clearing House” was London. A few hundred tons of gold were sufficient to meet the needs of that Clearing House. For further reading on the function of London as a clearing centre for world commerce, see “Real Bills” and associated articles by Antal E. Fekete at

Another example: In 1930, the US could sell very little to China, because the Chinese were poor and lacked purchasing power. Because the US sold very little to China, at the same time it could buy very little from China. Although prices of Chinese products were very low, the US could not buy much from China, because China did not buy from the US – China was poor and could not afford American products. Thus, trade between China and the US was balanced by the need to pay the balance of their transactions in gold. Balance was imperative. There was no chance of “structural imbalance”.

Under Free Trade with the gold standard, the great majority of transactions did not require movement of gold to complete the exchange. The goods exchanged paid for each other. Only small remainders had to be paid in gold. Consequently, international trade was limited by the volume of mutual purchases between parties; for example, Chinese silk paid for imports of American machinery, and vice-versa.

The gold standard imposed order and harmony. If President Nixon had not “closed the gold window” in 1971, the world would be radically different today. China would have taken a century or more to reach its present level. China could not buy much from the US, because it was poor; therefore, China could not sell much to the US.

All this changed radically with the abolition of the gold standard.

Everything changed because the United States, having removed gold from the world monetary system, could “pay” everything in dollars, and without the gold standard as a limiting institution, it could print dollars ad libitum – without limit. Thus, in the 1970s the United States started to buy huge amounts of high quality products from Japan, while the Japanese boasted: “Japan sells; Japan does not buy.” A situation that was impossible under the gold standard became perfectly possible under the fiat dollar standard. The Japanese became gigantic producers, their country an island transformed into a factory. Japan accumulated vast reserves of dollars sent from the US in exchange for Japanese products. This in turn triggered the de-industrialization of the US.

Take for example the US manufacturers of T.V. Some of the famous US factories that built TV receivers by the millions were “Philco”, “Admiral”, “Zenith”, and “Motorola”. The Japanese had better and cheaper products, and since the abandonment of the gold standard allowed Japan to sell without buying in turn, and allowed the US to buy without selling in turn, the result was that all the huge factories producing these TV’s in the US were closed down. That’s how “going off gold” closed down US industry.

Unlimited purchases from Japan flowed to the US and the world, because they were paid in dollars, which could be created in unlimited quantities. The balance the gold standard had imposed disappeared and imbalance took its place.

After 1971, the US embarked on a protracted, large-scale expansion of credit. As the nation was de-industrialized and high-paying jobs in industry disappeared, a lack of disposable income for the population was replaced with easy and cheap credit, to conceal the stagnation in per capita income. Consumer credit drove imports from Asia and furthered de-industrialization even more. The great expansion of American credit was made possible because the gold standard, which restrained the expansion of credit by the banking system, had been abandoned. It is no coincidence that some analysts have observed that in real terms, American workers have had no real increase in their income since 1970.

All mainstream economists consider the elimination of the gold standard perfectly acceptable. They still do not see, or do not want to see, that the “Law of Unforeseen Consequences” is at work: the enormous advantage the US gained by being able to pay unlimited amounts in irredeemable dollars has become the fatal cause of the industrial destruction of the US – and of the West in general. A Mexican saying applies: en el pecado llevas la penitencia – “sin brings with it its own punishment”.

The current malaise: financial crisis, industrial crisis, crisis of unemployment

Today the situation is far worse. China, with a population of 1.3 billion, has become a formidable power. No one can compete with China in price. China sells vast quantities of goods to the rest of the world, without the rest of the world having any chance of selling similar quantities to China, and China can do so, because today trade deficits are “paid” not in gold, but in dollars or euros or pounds sterling or yen, which will never be scarce: they are created at will by the USA, the European Central Bank, the Bank of England, or the Bank of Japan.

A fearful monster has been created as a consequence of the elimination of the gold standard, which imposed a limit: “You can only sell to those who sell to you; you can only buy from those who buy from you.” This limit no longer applies; everything is disarray, inequality, imbalance; “structural imbalance” prevails because we no longer have the gold standard.

The credit expansion boom has ended, and in its place we have a global financial crisis.  Today the problem of “structural imbalance” and the de-industrialization and unemployment it has produced in formerly industrialized countries acquires greater relevance with every passing day. What is to be done with the masses of jobless men and women? No one knows the answer, because the answer is not acceptable to the thinkers of today: the correction of “structural imbalances” and re-industrialization, in other words the creation of new jobs, lies in restoring the gold standard worldwide.

The “globalization” so highly praised by the financial press in recent years, has become the worst imaginable nightmare. It is no longer possible to support the unemployed with government handouts. The Sovereign State is close to bankruptcy. Thus, nature takes its revenge on those who dared violate its laws by seeking to impose false money on the world.

Richard Nixon’s elimination of the gold standard has proven to be the US’s best possible strategic gift to China and the rest of Asia. Today, China has a colossal industrial base that might have taken centuries to build, while the US is to a great extent devoid of factories and incapable of reclaiming its former glory. How tragic a fate for the US!

International and National Commerce

The word “commerce” is defined in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary as “Exchange of merchandise or services, esp. on a large scale [ French or from Latin COM(mercium frommerx mercis merchandise)]

Note that the “exchange of merchandise or services” cannot include as a complement to that exchange a fictitious payment with fiat money, which is neither merchandise nor a service, but rather a paper note or digital entry denoting a debt payable in nothing. In the case of the dollar, the debt is a debt of the Federal Reserve and registered accordingly on its balance sheet. A debt cannot be settled by tendering a debt instrument (which is payable in nothing in any case) and in effect, Balance of Payments debts have not, by any means, been settled in international commerce since 1971.

The non-settlement of international balance of payments debts has produced the accumulation of huge fictitious dollar reserves on the part of exporting countries, since 1971. The same holds for fictitious payments of export deficit debts with euros, pounds, yen or any other present-day currency. See the following graph:

Gold, up until the Bretton Woods Agreements of 1944, figured as the complement to the international exchange of merchandise or services and did settle outstanding balance of payments deficits, because it was a merchandise or commodity used as money.

According to the Bretton Woods Agreements, the fiduciary dollar was accepted as being as good as gold, with trust on the part of Central Banks upon the ability to redeem the dollar into gold. From 1944 up until 1971 then, these fiduciary dollars were held in Central Bank reserves as a credit call upon US gold; the final payment had not been effected and was delayed as a credit granted to the US until the dollars held in reserves were to be cashed in for gold at some future date.

As it turned out, the “fiducia” or “trust” was misplaced, for in 1971 the US reneged on the Bretton Woods Agreements of 1944, “closed the gold window” and stiffed the creditor countries. No final settlement of international commerce debts took place in 1971, nor has any taken place since thenthe truth of this statement is obscured by the mistaken idea that tendering a fiat currency in payment of an international debt constitutes settlement of that debt.

Once that false idea – that fiat money can settle a debt – is accepted as valid, then the problem of the enormous “imbalances” in world trade becomes an insoluble enigma. The best and brightest of today’s accredited economists attempt in vain to find a solution to a problem that cannot be solved except by the renewed use of gold as the international medium of commerce.

Regarding national commerce, the same reasoning applies. In reality, no one engaging in commerce in any country in the world today is actually paying for purchases, that is to say, there is no actual settlement of any debt. All individuals, corporations and government entities are merely shuffling debts (payable in nothing) between themselves, in the form of either paper bills or digital banking money, whether in dollars or any other currency in the world.

For internal national commerce the smaller value of the silver coin was convenient for day-to-day transactions at the popular level and did constitute settlement of debt when tendered in payment, for silver is a merchandise or commodity which, like gold, can participate in commercial exchange.

Today, China and the other great Asian exporters have belatedly realized that the dollars they received as “payment” for their mass exports are nothing more than digits in American computers. If the Chinese do not cooperate, the bankers in New York can erase those digits in half an hour, and leave China with no reserves. For this reason, the Chinese and Asians in general are buying gold, and will continue to buy it indefinitely: computers cannot erase gold reserves.

The awful truth about China is that the Chinese acquired their formidable industrial power in the short span of thirty years at a tremendous cost: for thirty years they worked for nothing. China has $2.5 Trillion of reserves; China does not have any use for these reserves, they have no intrinsic value and China does not know how to get rid of them in exchange for something tangible of value; these reserves are nothing more than digits in computers in the Western world. Net, net, net: China worked for thirty years to provide the world with a vast quantity of merchandise, in return for: nothing! Thirty years of slavery, to build an industrial empire!

Mexico: forced to use the protectionist “Band-Aid”

Mexico has its oil, perhaps more than we are told. Let’s hope so! Our economy is less complex, less sophisticated, than the US’s. According to a Mexican Treasury study carried out in 2007, 85% of Mexicans have no bank accounts – a good sign that they can get by on paper money and are not getting into trouble with credit card debt. The Mexican economy, as we see it, is like a broad, low pyramid. It is more stable than the American “skyscraper” economy, a highly complex economy. Mexico is better equipped to survive the present crisis than the USA.

In today’s great world financial crisis of false money, we are likely to see countries around the world resort to protectionism: the leaders will be the same countries that so recently sang the praises of “globalization”. In this probable case, Mexico will have to do the same. It is a far from ideal scenario, but it is imperative for lack of the gold standard. Protectionism limits productive efficiency in any country because it limits the market for its protected products to its own national market. A limited market hampers efficiency. The supply of goods available to the population will be more limited and probably of lower quality at higher prices. (Protectionism will have similar effects in the US.)

Mexico will have to restrict imports in the near future. Otherwise, we will suffer serial currency devaluations. Protectionism is not the best policy, but Mexico will probably be forced to resort to it, for lack of the gold standard, which would be the best means of creating jobs in the US, in the rest of the “developed” world and here.

The effective cure

If Mexico aspires to anything more, we shall have to wait for the restoration of the gold standard worldwide. In the meantime, neither demagogy nor Socialism will solve our problems. Only the gold standard can do that.

For our industrial capacity to gain access to international markets – and for Mexicans to gain access to products from international markets – it will be necessary to restore the gold standard. Bilateral trade agreements are not optimum. The optimum is to have the world as a market, where payment for exports is balanced by imports and residual balances are paid in gold. Payment in gold of export deficits and collection in gold of export surpluses is sine qua non. Under the gold standard, Mexico would achieve sustainable prosperity and full employment for our admirable workforce.

Products from China and Asia in general, which today undermine our industrial capacity and create unemployment because we cannot compete with the extremely low wages of the Asian countries, would cease to be a problem under the gold standard; if the Asian countries, which today invade our markets, do not buy similar quantities of Mexican products – which today they do not – they would not be able to export their products to Mexico. The gold standard would fairly balance exports with imports; it would prevent the strategic destruction of our industry and protect us naturally, without the need for protectionist barriers.

The same therapy Mexico needs – the restoration of the gold standard – is what the world requires to regain economic health and sustainable prosperity.

Under a restored gold standard, Americans will not be able to purchase goods from China, unless China purchases American goods with a similar value. If the Chinese find nothing of value to purchase in the US, then Americans will be unable to purchase Chinese goods. It’s as simple as that! To continue selling to the West, China will have to open wide its doors to imports!

If Americans find they simply cannot purchase Chinese goods, Americans will manufacture those goods themselves. Industries and new jobs will spring up like mushrooms immediately, to satisfy American demand. International balance will be restored, unemployment will disappear.

Protectionism is not a cure, it is a Band-Aid. Mexico will not achieve the prosperity of which it is capable through protectionism nor by resorting to Socialist measures that crush the creative spirit of the individual. Nor can we succumb to renouncing our nationality and accepting absorption by the US, imitating all the (very costly) measures the current US administration imposes on its citizens. The ideal combination for Mexico includes a moderate dose of nationalism, a government that does not incur deficits, the institution of a monetized one-ounce silver coin, the “Libertad”, to stimulate and protect savings, and eventual participation in a new global gold standard, in which our nation can find the opportunity to fulfill its destiny.

“The gold standard is the generator and protector of jobs.”



Rupert Murdoch’s Failing Attempts to Control the Internet Reformation


Saturday, July 02, 2011 – by Anthony Wile

Rupert Murdoch lost nearly his entire investment in MySpace the other day when he sold the failing social network to musician and actor Justin Timberlake and an ad agency he backs for some US$30 million. This was a good deal less than the US$500 million-plus Mudoch paid for it.

Why did Murdoch make such a bad investment? Because he hoped to use the network as a vehicle into which he could place and disseminate news. He wanted to make MySpace into a mechanism to deliver current-events content. When it didn’t work out – and he must have known that fairly soon – he obviously lost interest. And as his interest waned, so did MySpace.

This speaks to Murdoch’s desperation – and mainstream media’s generally. In a digital world, he is willing to burn US$500 million simply to confirm that a social network is not a news delivery system. I could have told him that for a much lower fee.

This also shows us the importance of news to the powers-that-be. The Anglosphere elites – for whom Murdoch evidently and obviously works – are determined (thus far without much success) to find a way to protect their failing information franchise.

Nothing in the past 300 years or so, while the elites have advanced their one-world-order, has been so devastating to their plans as the Internet and the rise of the alternative media driven Internet Reformation. It has poisoned the chalice and befouled the well; it has unbalanced the clarity of the concoction and clouded it with truth. A bitter brew … for them!

Western power elites will do ANYTHING to reclaim their news franchise. When one looks at 20th century media development one is struck by its massive size and strategic composition. Every part of Western 20th century media worked seamlessly together. The whole idea was to create an increasingly militarized society that would accept global government as part of the natural order of things.

Hollywood delivered messages of violence and fear; the magazines and newspapers rehashed the same sorts of information and television – that unique, talking box – broadcast alarm and resolution-of-the same 24-hours a day.

There was no escape from it. If the world was not in death throes, that’s only because the wise men clustered at the top of the West’s painstakingly created authoritarian systems were saving the world on a real-time basis.

It is news dissemination that the power elite craves. Everything else is just a backdrop. The entertainment, the talk shows, the game shows, these were all merely the wrapper supporting the main act. Everything in Western media in the 20th century led up to the News Program. And the talking heads providing the “news” were glorified as great intellects worthy of the most arduous approbation.

Walter Cronkite, a febrile and shallow socialist, was the “most trusted man in news.” Dan Rather, a compulsive self-aggrandizer, was a countrified, attack-dog. These individuals did nothing but read the news; but they were revered. Today, things have changed. Mainstream news … very little. As a delivery mechanism of mind control it is failing. In fact, every part of the intricate system is failing.

In order to build a new world order, people must be either frightened or enticed into cooperating. It is a great deal easier to scare people than to bribe them, less costly too. But when the delivery mechanism fails, when people begin to tune it out as they have in the 21st century, then the message is muddled and gradually grows more insignificant.

Murdoch’s properties are supposed to provide the conservative half of a worldwide Hegelian dialectic. He’s been funded by Western elites to provide this vision because if one is to move society toward global governance, a conversation is necessary. Thesis, antithesis … synthesis. Murdoch provides the antithesis, with relish.

As a major facilitator of the one-world conspiracy, Murdoch is tasked with taming the Internet Reformation. It must be brought under control and the Internet made to work on behalf of a larger world order.

One can watch him writhe, these days. We’ve compared him to Hamlet, especially a few years ago when he really seemed at a loss and began to lash out while mumbling to himself. He bought MySpace and ruined it like a petulant child when it didn’t perform as planned. When he began MySpace had nearly 75 million users. It now has less than 35 million.

He’s onto the next gambit – increasingly known in the mainstream media as “fail walls.” These pay walls encircle Internet content like moats around castles. Instead of seeing articles for free, readers are enticed with an occasional news story and then urged to sign up and pay for access to fuller content.

The New York Times tried this a few years ago and saw its on-line circulation plunge; it is trying again now with a different model known as “freemium” – a mix of free and paid content which is said to be working marginally better.

Murdoch, however, is the most active participant in this futile circus. He’s placed paywalls around his properties in Britain, The Times and Sunday Times, in the US with such publications as The Wall Street Journal and is now transplanting the strategy to his Australian publications. The fairly thick walls around his UK publications have indeed kept casual browsers out. Reports claim that the UK Times has blocked 20 million viewers and replaced them with 79,000 digital subscribers.

This is heralded as a “success” in the brave new world of the Internet era. Meanwhile, circulation figures from ABC show that The Times and Sunday Times print sales fell 14.8% and 9.5% year-on-year. The UK Guardian News & Media Group have pursued a non-paywall approach and reportedly generated a 50 per cent increase in digital advertising revenue in the first six months of the financial year. Free content – open access – works better than pay walls.

Murdoch has also started a dedicated, online newspaper known as The Daily. It is delivered through Apple aps and people pay for it. But the problem is no different; the information being delivered hasn’t changed, only the delivery system. Murdoch keeps tinkering with the hardware when it’s the software that is the problem.

It could be that the open-access model is the one that works the best. It certainly makes the most sense. The 20th century, as we’ve written before, was a time of artificial news scarcity. The 21st century is one of news plenty. In such a brave new world, how can one successfully charge for content? Better to give it away and try to surround it with ads or, in the case of the Daily Bell, operate a non-profit, advertising free site and rely on the generosity of readers to help make the message grow.

But the trouble for the mainstream press is that the information has to be compelling in order to compete with the alternative media. DB reports a kind of truth; the mainstream media promotes fear and globalism.

In an environment where there is a plethora of product, the only distinguishing factor is quality. Power-elite media does not “do” quality very well. That is not why it exists. This is another problem Murdoch has when it comes to trying to charge for product. His news and information are a tool designed to advance the larger conversation and move it in the direction of international governance. He is not a free agent in this regard.

In order to compete with the Internet’s alternative media, Murdoch’s media has changed its tone. It is much more strident than in the past about “conservative” issues. This is because the free-market thinking that’s driving the Internet Reformation is pulling the dialogue in a libertarian direction. Murdoch compensates with conservative viewpoints but gradually the fulcrum of the conversation is shifting.

In the 21st century, the larger social conversation is gradually repolarizing itself around what is natural and normal. The more people learn, the less convincing his conservative editorial thrust becomes; and the more strident authoritarian voices like Bill O’Relly’s become. People, once they understand their own manipulation, trend toward the libertarian point of view, which is why in the US, libertarian Texas Congressman Ron Paul is increasingly popular.

In order to accommodate the realigned conversation, Murdoch is forced to go along with it. This accounts for the rise of people like Glenn Beck. There is no way that Beck’s increasingly libertarian viewpoints would have been tolerated in the 20th century – and evidently not in the 21st century either.

Obviously, the Glenn Beck experiment proved too arduous for Murdoch’s Fox as Beck has been released and is now starting his own TV channel. It may be that Beck proves more successful on his own than with Fox. He claims to have retained his soul. This is another problem that Murdoch’s media has – it doesn’t appear to have much of a soul.

As the conversation shifts, Murdoch has to shift with it. But in order to accommodate the changing conversation he begins to BECOME exactly what his elite backers hoped to eradicate. To retain credibility he must present a version free-market thinking; yet this is anathema to his sponsors who wish only to promote covert and overt globalism. It is a conundrum.

This puzzle shall remain with the elites. The Internet Reformation, in fact, is a process not an episode. The trends that the Internet has produced are only going to get more powerful. As with the Gutenberg Press, the Internet’s effects will not easily be tamed. The results of the Gutenberg Press – the Renaissance, Reformation, etc. – reverberated long after its inception. The changes began to occur with rapidity some 100 years its invention. The changes spawned by the Internet began after about 20 years.

From this we can see, mathematically speaking, that the ratio between the Internet and the Press is perhaps one-to-five. It took the elites about 350- 400 years to control the Press and to begin to monopolize its output. Thus, it may take the elites about 50-75 years to control the Internet.

But there is something else to consider. Assume for the sake argument that the mainstream media historical timeline is an accurate one (which we no longer do, necessarily) there can be no doubt things have speeded up. There was a 25,000 year gap between cave paintings and incised tablets. There was perhaps a 10,000 year gap between tablets and papyrus. There was perhaps a 5,000 year gap between papyrus and the printing press. There was a 500 year gap between the invention of the press and the advent of the Internet.

It may be that just about the time the elites have managed to fully control the Internet – in say 50 years – a NEW technology will come along and make life difficult all over again. The competition between the elites and the middle class was fully joined with the advent of the Gutenberg Press. This marked a fundamental shift in human history from what we can tell, defining history as a race between technology and elite mind control. The confrontation has only sharpened in the Internet era.

We are in the early stages of a great Internet-inspired Reformation. The Gutenberg-inspired Reformation gave rise to fundamental shifts in society 500 years ago and redefined the relationship between peasantry and the elites of the day. It also kicked off a series of low-level, pan-European wars.

If one studies the Gutenberg Press and its impacts, one can see plenty of parallels between what is occurring now and what occurred then. At the time, the elites struggled to advance their control and maintain what they had already achieved. But it seems to me they lost control, at least temporarily, and now they are losing control again. For those in tune with what is happening, the 21st century may eventually prove a fine time to be alive and working.

At some point, the confluence of modern free-market thinking may force the powers-that-be to take a step back. Murdoch’s struggles are not made up. One only has to look at them over the past ten years to see a concretization of the theoretical proposals we’ve presented her at DB.

These issues are real. They may have great ramifications as the Internet Reformation rolls on, affecting everything from investments to lifestyle choices. In fact, I’d argue the impact is already a powerful one, even though people may not realize just what is occurring. Murdoch believes that he can regain control of the message with social networks, paywalls and dedicated content. He will likely go to his deathbed (he is not a young man) believing this. He and his backers and handlers may be wrong.

And just to prove how wrong … you can join the Daily Bell for no charge and receive an advertising-free perspective on the Great Conversation. We wear our agenda proudly on our editorial sleeves – to spread the awareness of free-market thinking concepts worldwide in the hope that the Internet Reformation (Knowledge Revolution) can halt the drive towards manipulated globalism. Take a look at what others are saying about our rapidly growing community of free-market thinkers – Subscribe Now.

New San Francisco bridge built in China to be shipped to US




By Malcolm Moore, Shanghai

Next month, four enormous steel skeletons, the last of the 12 segments of the bridge, will be shipped 6,500 miles from Shanghai to San Francisco before being assembled on site.

The bridge, which will connect San Francisco to Oakland on the other side of the bay, is a sign of how China has moved on from building roads and ports in Africa and the developing world and is now aggressively bidding for, and winning, major construction and engineering projects in the United States and Europe.

After building forests of skyscrapers in Beijing and Shanghai, showpiece buildings like the Bird’s Nest stadium and the Guangzhou Opera House, and a high-speed rail network that is the envy of the world, Chinese construction companies are flush with cash and confidence. This week, Wen Jiabao, the Chinese premier, lobbied David Cameron to give the contract for the UK’s new high speed rail link to a Chinese company.

According to Engineering News Record, five of the world’s top 10 contractors, in terms of revenue, are now Chinese, with likes of China State Construction Engineering Group (CSCEC) overtaking established American giants like Bechtel.

CSCEC has already built seven schools in the US, apartment blocks in Washington DC and New York and is in the middle of building a 4,000-room casino in Atlantic City. In New York, it has won contracts to renovate the subway system, build a new metro platform near Yankee stadium, and refurbish the Alexander Hamilton Bridge over the Harlem River.

Meanwhile, in Europe, China has signed deals with Serbia for a bridge over the River Danube and a connecting road to Belgrade. A £215 million deal will see Chinese firms refurbishing and upgrading a Serbian coal-fired power plant, while China is building a new mobile phone network in Hungary and wants to sell Bulgaria a nuclear power plant, built from a French design.

“The European construction market is huge and the Chinese are very interested in it,” said Werner Buelen at the European Federation of Building and Woodworkers, an umbrella organisation for Europe’s construction trade unions. “At the moment, they seem to be running a pilot programme to decide whether to access the market directly by bidding on contracts or whether to buy European construction companies and then use those to access the market,” he added.

“They have a very clever mechanism, with several advantages. The first is financing, which they have better access to because Chinese companies are mostly state-owned. It is getting more and more difficult for European contractors to access financing, and you need to have a lot of finance in the construction industry,” he said.

“Then they have managed to transfer Chinese workers, who are cheaper.

They can also use construction machinery they have built in China.

Finally, because they can generate still profit despite their low bids, they use that money to hire famous architects and demonstrate they can deliver a project above the normal standard”.

However, earlier this month, China was fired from its first major prestige project in Europe, the new A2 motorway in Poland for the Euro 2012 football championships. After bidding 44 per cent lower than the Polish government had budgeted for the road, a Chinese state-owned building company found it was unable to pay its workers to finish the job.

“It is difficult for Chinese companies,” said Wang Shouqing, a professor at the International Engineering research department at the elite Tsinghua university. “They are not familiar with Western culture, law or standards. What happened in Poland was a very bad example for other Chinese companies. It could take another decade or even 20 years to put our footprint on Europe and the US.” The embarrassment in Poland led China’s State Council to publish a notice on Monday warning the heads of China’s state-owned companies that they would be “punished” if their companies negligently lost money on overseas projects.

Norman Haste OBE, an engineer whose projects include the second Severn crossing and the design of Heathrow’s Terminal 5, said he had encountered Chinese firms bidding aggressively in the Middle East and that he had a “high regard for what they have done in recent years”.

He said: “Their capabilities are second to none, and they are able to finance projects. There is a big demand for new investment in Eastern Europe and similarly in the United States and they will do well there.” But he added that the history of protectionism in the French, German and UK markets might be harder to break.

Where Will You Go When the Sovereign Debt Volcano Blows?


Thursday, June 30, 2011 – by Ron Holland

“People never believe in volcanoes until the lava actually overtakes them.” – George Santayana

Last fall, while on an investment cruise, I had the opportunity to visit a “dormant” volcano in Chile. There was even a ski area with lift, restaurants etc. near the top on the lava and cinders. I thought at the time how I would ski the volcano but never risk my funds on a real estate investment there for obvious reasons.

Today we find the United States and most of Europe in a similar situation. We risk an eruption and collapse of the mountain of unsustainable sovereign debt built up over the last two decades. Frankly, the US dollar and national debt situation is so dire and our means to contain a sovereign debt crisis so limited by multiple wars, Washington’s debt and political incompetence at home, that anything could happen – almost overnight. Even a minor foreign policy or economic event like a Greek default or Middle East crisis could reap havoc with the precarious interlocking sovereign debt pyramid in the West.

Of course, no nation wants a collapse – especially China – because a western debt collapse and write down is certainly uncharted financial waters and the contagion risks are global. Still, America and most European governments and the central banking elites, which created the criminal sovereign debt fiasco, are only trying to buy more time and delay the inevitable. This inaction means the threat of an immediate US debt and dollar collapse cannot be ruled out. Therefore, readers who have not protected themselves certainly have cause to worry because now could be too late.

It Is Exit Time For Your Gold, Wealth & Family

Although you may have some time, nothing else has to happen before a big collapse could take place, even within days. Consequently, after 30 years of watching, writing and creating protective retirement planning and financial strategies, today I’m finally going to yell “FIRE” inside the closed ‘financial iron curtain” which is America.

If you have failed to store your precious metals outside the US, diversify out of the dollar or reduce or terminate your private retirement plan, there is now a clear danger of a Washington dollar and sovereign debt crisis which could sweep away most of your remaining wealth and financial security.

I do not have a crystal ball or inside political information on a specific imminent threat, only the observation that the sovereign debt crisis from Europe, a debt ceiling misstep from the clowns in Washington or a Middle East event could suddenly trigger the collapse. Actually any major political or economic shock could bring the Madoff stylePonzi scheme, which Greenspan and Bernanke have created, down almost overnight on top of us.

This will likely happen over a weekend and the following Monday morning you could wake up to Presidential Executive Orders “means testing” you out of Social Security benefits if you still have substantial retirement benefits or personal savings. You’ll likely discover an end to your home interest deductions, new confiscatory taxes and restrictions on US gold and silver, controls on moving private wealth and funds to safety offshore and dramatic hikes in taxes and cuts in government programs. In addition, spiking inflation rates, violence and massive protests will immediately follow these confiscatory actions and cutbacks. You can also expect severe banking and stock market liquidity restrictions, or closures, and this will only be the beginning. In short your wealth will be trapped in dollars and locked up for the duration of the emergency inside the American jurisdiction.

Therefore if you haven’t already prepared for this type of crisis contingency ahead of time, I’m telling you there will be little you can do after the fact. Washington will simply take and throw your wealth and promised benefits at the problem thus buying them more time with your wealth.

The Central Banks, City of London & Wall Street Have Looted America and the World

Back in 2007, did the Federal Reserve or your politicians or financial experts predict a collapse in housing prices of 30 to 50 percent? Remember, Bernanke, Greorge W. Ben Bush and Barack Obama all promised this was a temporary blip in the long-term upward trend in housing values. All advised you to “stay the course.”

Today, Tim Geithner claims we have a “strong dollar policy” but have you observed the 35% plus appreciation in the currencies of Brazil and Switzerland to the dollar in the last year? The EU establishment has repeatedly claimed over the last few months that the Greek problems are solved but these fake solutions usually only last a few days at best.

Back here in the US, there is talk about deficit reduction, cutting programs and tax increases but nothing really happens because solving the problem is political suicide. The American and European elites are buying time knowing that only a crash or war will give them the opportunity to act as they did in the 2008 meltdown. They only wait for a cataclysmic event to provide the fear, excuse and public support for government action needed to grab our private wealth and to delay their problems.

The mainstream American press doesn’t cover it, however the rest of the world knows that Wall Street banks and their central banking buddies in London and New York created the sovereign debt crisis. They then sold their profitable template, or imposed it on the end of a gun, for debt democracy to politicians around the world as a means to buy votes and maintain political control. The scam is now over and no one has a solution to the tens of trillions in debt already spent.

While many millions of poor people overseas are going hungry because of our exported inflation on food costs, now the foreign middle classes are being impoverished just to pay interest on the sovereign debts to our banking elites. Although, much of the world correctly blames their thieving politicians who’ve been bought off by our banking elites as the problem, our nation is also a target for their outrage.

Foreign politicians will attempt to shift the blame to America and this will speed the end of our American free ride from the fiat dollar and our reserve currency status. The world is just waiting for the spark to start the run out of the dollar and our Treasury debt. No nation will really help us when the collapse comes.

What If You Have More Time?

Maybe we have months instead of weeks – or at most a couple of years before the event takes place. Allow our politicians “buying time” to work for your benefit instead of theirs:

1. Educate Yourself With Free Subscriptions: First, to protect yourself, you must assume the balance of establishment news coverage and opinion is all disinformation designed to delay panic and create actions which will benefit the establishment probably to the detriment of your best interests. Therefore I suggest you subscribe to the following free e-mail publications:

• Follow what the elites are planning ahead of time with The Daily Bell – Subscribe.

• Keep up with the real freedom news and philosophy by subscribing to – Subscribe.

• Get an Austrian economics view on the markets and gold with Mountain Vision – Subscribe.

2. Maintain Liquidity & Reduce Political Risk: Legally and following all reporting requirements, move your private wealth outside the US into safe secure investments which will remain liquid and trading should US markets close as they did following 9/11.

3. Create A Domestic Safe-Haven Location: The potential for violence, theft and property destruction in the US dwarfs what could happen in Greece. If you can afford a safe-haven second home away from major cities and high crime locations, then do so. Consider taking advantage of the real estate collapse and buying something you can enjoy in good times and have as insurance for bad times.

4. You Will Likely Be Safer Outside the US: In a serious crisis, most of the criminals out to steal your property and do harm to you will come with official government sanction and not from traditional criminal elements. Consider a more secure safe-haven jurisdiction where the rule of law might still prevail with a condo, second citizenship or residency in a nation outside the United States for the duration of the domestic disorder and economic collapse. Remember, currency and government debt collapse is common throughout the world and history shows the difficulties don’t last forever. My fear is we haven’t seen a world reserve currency collapse before and the aftermath is uncharted waters. I would expect a scenario several magnitudes worse than the 1991 Russian collapse.

5. Secure Your Gold: Finally move most of your gold or silver offshore where it will remain secure rather than become a tempting target for confiscation from parasitical groups and individuals. Washington will need your gold as I doubt there has been substantial gold at Fort Knox since Nixon closed the gold window. The eventual outcome of the crisis may well be some fake gold backing for the dollar. Why else would anyone use a collapsed currency?

6. Don’t Trust Washington With Your Retirement Benefits: Consider closing and taking a withdrawal from your retirement plans to avoid new taxes and penalties at withdrawal, the means testing and loss of your Social Security benefits or the forced investment into collapsing Treasury obligations.

You can read all about the gold and retirement threats in my Lew Rockwell archive. Pay specific attention to the following essays:

The Greek Tragedy
There’s Gold In Fort Knox?
Retire In Poverty- Retirement Plan Nationalization
The Obama Retirement Trap

The debt crisis is here and I promise you only that you will not hear the truth on cable financial news or from your establishment investment firm or professional. To avoid a panic, neither the government, the Federal Reserve or Wall Street will be honest with you about the risks we face, just like they all lied and covered-up before the market meltdown in 2008.

If you are an American, the last place you should keep most of your wealth now is in the dollar or your home country. You might personally get out but your wealth will be trapped for the duration and probably lost during the disruption.

Final note: In my bio below, you can read more about my efforts and others who are fighting for our/your liberty. Addiotionally, Take some time to peruse the biographies and glossary setions of the Daily Bell ThinkTank to familiarize yourself with current and past powerful elites and the means they utilize to control and destroy our/your life, liberty and property.


A special report on international banking


Chained but untamed

The world’s banking industry faces massive upheaval as post-crisis reforms start to bite. They may make it only a little safer but much less profitable, says Jonathan Rosenthal

Supervisors and regulators almost everywhere are still trying to find ways to deal with banks that have become too big or too interconnected to be allowed to fail. If anything, the crisis has exacerbated this problem. Some of those banks have become even bigger or more interconnected. And governments made good on the implicit guarantees offered to banks, encouraging them to take even bigger risks.


In this special report                                            OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Don’t be afraid to learn something folks! READ THESE LINKS!!!

Sources & acknowledgementsReprints

In America the rules to implement the Dodd-Frank act are beginning to take shape. Passed last year, the law runs to 2,319 pages, but it is little more than a statement of intent. Before it can take effect, 11 different agencies have to write the detailed regulations. These will redefine much of the industry in America and around the world, reversing decades of deregulation in finance in the world’s biggest economy.

One key provision is the separation of investment banking from commercial banking, known as the Volcker rule. It will restore some elements of the Depression-era regulatory regime that was meant to ensure that commercial banks did not “speculate” with protected deposits by forbidding them from trading securities. Other regulations in America will set the fees that some of the world’s biggest retail banks can charge when one of their customers swipes a debit card. These make no pretence to making banking safer, but reflect politicians’ anger at banks and suspicions of those who run them.

Britain, for long the most enthusiastic champion of financial deregulation, is going further still, pondering whether banks’ retail arms should be so tightly regulated that they become little more than public utilities. Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, in a recent speech in New York wondered aloud whether the use of deposits to fund loans should be outlawed. In essence, he was questioning a basic building block of modern banking. In April a government-appointed commission said that Britain’s banks should wall off their retail arms so they could be salvaged if the rest of the business were to collapse. It is also trying to devise resolution regimes and living wills to reduce the harm done when banks collapse, and it wants more competition in retail banking.

Britain is not alone in reacting strongly. Switzerland, which grew rich as its buccaneering international banks sailed the tides of capital flowing around the world, is now downsizing its global banking ambitions. It plans to impose such strict capital standards on its biggest banks that their investment-banking arms will be forced to shrink or leave the country.

The wave of new regulation comes as many banks are still struggling to regain their footing after the crisis. Across much of Europe, bad debts held by banks are impairing the balance-sheets of their governments. Ireland and Spain are trying to convince bondholders that they can and will repay their national debts, despite the losses incurred by their bankers. Doubts about those two countries’ creditworthiness, as well as that of Greece and Portugal, are spreading across the continent’s banks, raising borrowing costs and unsettling markets everywhere.

In America big banks are healthier, having largely rebuilt their balance sheets. Yet not all have recovered. The country’s smaller regional and community banks include some 800 troubled institutions at risk of being seized by regulators if their capital ratios fall. In both America and Britain households are deeply indebted. For banks, growth in these markets, as across much of the rest of the rich world, is likely to be slow. In Japan banks are well into their second decade of a slow-motion crisis, while in China officials fret that banks are growing too quickly.

There is much that regulators around the world are doing well, yet many of their actions have been piecemeal. As a result, they tend to shuffle risk around from one country to the next instead of reducing it across the global financial system. In some ways they have exacerbated the dangers. Dodd-Frank, in its zeal to prevent any more taxpayer-funded bank bail-outs, has curbed the Federal Reserve’s ability to provide cash to banks that are fundamentally sound but suffering a shortage of liquidity. That has made it harder for the central bank to act as a lender of last resort, a principle of central banking established almost 140 years ago by Walter Bagehot, a former editor of this newspaper.

The unwelcome consequences of some of the other new rules now being introduced may be greater yet. For example, the European Commission’s decision to regulate bankers’ bonuses in a bid to limit risk-taking may have the perverse effect of driving up banks’ costs and making their earnings more volatile.

The bright spots

Banks in emerging markets face different and far more exciting challenges. They need to grow quickly enough to keep pace with economies racing ahead at breakneck speed and to reach the legions of potential customers in villages and slums who are hungry for banking. Rapid growth and the spread of computing and communications technologies have turned these markets into huge laboratories of innovation. This special report will argue that banks in countries such as India and Kenya have much to teach those in the rich world. These lessons could come in handy, for the torrent of reregulation in developed countries will soon be raising banks’ costs, trimming their profits and forcing some of their customers to look for cheaper banking services.


This is Swampyank's copy of "The Jury&quo...

Image via Wikipedia

Fully Informed Jury Association


In 1734, John Zenger printed an article condemning the governor of New York. Colonial law prohibited publications that did not meet government approval and Zenger was arrested for seditious libel.

Zenger did not deny publishing the offending work. During his trial, the judge instructed the jury that this admission was evidence enough to convict.

In fact, the jury disregarded the judge’s instructions and found Zenger not guilty, based on what they deem to be an unjust law.

This landmark case for freedom of the press is one of the earliest and best known examples of jury nullification.

A jury is designed to protect society from law – breakers, but it is also a means to protect society from bad laws.

A jury can nullify a law that it believes unjust or wrongly applied to a defendant.

Jury independence is your power to judge the law as well as the evidence, and to vote on a verdict according to conscience.

Judges are not required to warn you of jury nullification power. In many jurisdictions it is forbidden for attorneys to advise the jury of the possibility, and jurors must learn from extra legal sources.

The fear of anarchy guides such restriction, and there are examples of nullification gone awry, (eg, racist juries refusing to convict white supremacist for killing black people.) Another example is, no matter what the evidence, it is within your rights to declare the defendants of nonviolent drug charges, NOT GUILTY. Even when they have confessed.

The war on drugs laws are unconstitutional, and only serve to supply the private prison industry with profits.

You can preserve freedom by refusing to convict people of non – violent crimes, and the judges cannot stop you.

If you think that all law is just, consider this.

The fact that there is widespread existence of juries prerogative, an approval of its existence as a necessary counter to case hardened judges and arbitrary prosecutors, does not establish as an imperative that the jury must be informed by the judge of that power.

If you believe that the law is a defender of freedom, you are mis-informed. The law is a defender of corporate government.




On the Grand Jury #1

Fully Informed Jury Association

Post Office Box 5570   Helena, MT 59604-5570    1-800-TEL-JURY

The U.S. Attorneys Manual states that prosecutors “must recognize that the grand jury is an independent body, whose functions include not only the investigation of crime and the initiation of criminal prosecution but also the protection of the citizenry from unfounded criminal charges” (USAM, Section 9-11.010).

The Manual recognizes that targets of investigations have the right and can “request or demand the opportunity to tell the grand jury their side of the story” (USAM, Section 9-11.152).

The Supreme Court states that the independent grand jury’s purpose is not only to investigate possible criminal conduct, but to act as a “protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental action,” and to perform its functions, the independent grand jury “deliberates in secret and may determine alone the course of its inquiry” (United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338 (1974)).

An independent grand jury is to “stand between the prosecutor and the accused,” and to determine whether a charge is legitimate, or is “dictated by malice or personal ill will” (Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906)).  The grand jury is to protect citizens against “hasty, malicious and oppressive persecution” and to insure that prosecutions are not “dictated by an intimidating power or by malice and personal ill will” (Wood v. Georgia, 370 U.S. 375 (1962)).

The independent grand jury is described as “a body with powers of investigation and inquisition, the scope of whose inquiries is not to be limited narrowly by questions of propriety or forecasts of the probable result of the investigation” (Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972)).

“Without thorough and effective investigation, the grand jury would be unable either to ferret out crimes deserving of prosecution, or to screen out charges not warranting prosecution.” (U.S. v. Sells Engineering, 463 U.S. 418 (1983)

Here are some comments from a person who was brought up for indictment:

“Obviously a grand jury could not fulfill its duties if it is only allowed to hear evidence which the government chooses to let it hear.

Therefore, while I would be more than happy to answer any questions that you or members of the grand jury may have, and while I have no intention of engaging in a prolonged, unlimited monologue, there is additional information which must be provided to the grand jury in order for the members thereof to thoroughly perform their Constitutional duties.

I trust that you, the prosecutor, will not attempt to censor me, or suppress such information from being seen by the grand jury, when I am testifying.” The grand jury refused to indict her after hearing her testimony, by the way.

Find out if there is a sign-up sheet to volunteer to get on grand juries in your county, state, and federal jurisdictions.  Sign up if you can!  It is the best way to put a lid on out-of-control government prosecutions. If you are serving on a grand jury, you have the authority and the duty to call in the person or persons being accused, to dismiss the prosecutor and government employees from the room, and to question and hear from the person the prosecutor wants to charge.

You have the duty to ensure that no person is brought to trial unless there is obvious and sufficient evidence to return an indictment. As a grand juror, you are the first line of defense for private citizens against ambitious prosecutors and unconstitutional laws being used against The People.

Our founders intended that our independent grand juries protect people from ambitious or tyrannical government employees and laws.  You, as a grand juror, stand as the first bulwark against government tyranny. While you must protect us all from dangerous people who harm others, you must always be aware that your first job is to protect harmless people from unfair, unjust and unreasonable government laws.  When laws encroach on private individual rights, you cannot be required to enforce them by returning an indictment.  When you refuse to indict harmless people, you help to protect us all, you included, from out-of-control government actions.

As an independent grand jury, you also have the right to initiate your own investigations on evidence presented to you, and to indict anyone if you feel they are guilty of wrongdoing, including those government employees and elected officials who are not upholding an oath of public office.

FIJA/AJI Document name and order #: On the Grand Jury: OTGJ#1  August 15, 2010

The above was copied from a PDF file at .Go there and look on the home page for the Juror’s Guide and read items 2,3,4,&5.

Al Gore, Agenda 21, and Population Control


From the American Dream
It is impossible to defeat your enemy if you do not know who they are and what their goals are. The people who are quoted in this article are much more dangerous to our way of life than any raghead with an AK. If these people really want to control the population—-perhaps they should consider suicide, it would be a great beginning.

In Liberty

Imagine going to sleep one night and waking up many years later in a totally different world.  In this futuristic world, literally everything you do is tightly monitored and controlled by control freak bureaucrats in the name of “sustainable development” and with the goal of promoting “the green agenda”.  An international ruling body has centralized global control over all human activity.  What you eat, what you drink, where you live, how warm or cold your home can be and how much fuel you can use is determined by them.  Anyone that dissents or that tries to rebel against the system is sent off for “re-education”.  The human population is 90 percent lower than it is today in this futuristic society, and all remaining humans have been herded into tightly constricted cities which are run much like prisons.  Does all of that sound good to you?  Well, this is what Agenda 21 is all about.
Yes, I know all this sounds like a plot from a science fiction novel.  But it is actually real.  178 nations have signed on to Agenda 21.  “Eco-prophets” such as Al Gore travel all over the world teaching us how wonderful “sustainable development” will be.  This agenda is being pushed in our schools, at our universities, on our televisions and in our movies.

So exactly what is Agenda 21?  The following is how the United Nations defines Agenda 21….

Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.

When you start doing deep research into Agenda 21, you will find that describing it as a “comprehensive plan” is an understatement.  Virtually all forms of human activity impact the environment.  The rabid “environmentalists” behind the green agenda intend to take all human activity and put it into a box called “sustainable development”.

One of the key elements of “sustainable development” is population control.  The United Nations (along with radical “environmental” leaders such as Al Gore) actually believes that there are far too many people on earth.

So what is the solution?

Sadly, they actually believe that we need to start reducing the population.

Just this week, Al Gore made the following statement regarding population control….

“One of the things we could do about it is to change the technologies, to put out less of this pollution, to stabilize the population, and one of the principle ways of doing that is to empower and educate girls and women. You have to have ubiquitous availability of fertility management so women can choose how many children have, the spacing of the children.

You have to lift child survival rates so that parents feel comfortable having small families and most important ­ you have to educate girls and empower women. And that’s the most powerful leveraging factor, and when that happens, then the population begins to stabilize and societies begin to make better choices and more balanced choices.”

Do you notice how whenever global leaders talk about “empowering” women these days it always ends up with them having less children?

This population control agenda is also reflected in official UN documents.

The following is language from a UN resolution that was adopted by the UN General Assembly that was designed to further the implementation of Agenda 21….

“….population growth rates have been declining globally, largely as a result of expanded basic education and health care. That trend is projected to lead to a stable world population in the middle of the twenty-first century… The current decline in population growth rates must be further promoted through national and international policies that promote economic development, social development, environmental protection, and poverty eradication, particularly the further expansion of basic education, with full and equal access for girls and women, and health care, including reproductive health care, including both family planning and sexual health, consistent with the report of the International Conference on Population and Development.”

Most Americans don’t grasp it yet, but the truth is that the global elite are absolutely obsessed with population control.  In fact, there is a growing consensus among the global elite that they need to get rid of 80 to 90 percent of us.

The number one commandment of the infamous Georgia Guidestones is this: “Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.”

Unfortunately, a very high percentage of our global leaders actually believe in this stuff.

Sadly, this philosophy is now regularly being reflected in official UN documents.  For example, the March 2009 U.N. Population Division policy brief begins with the following shocking statement….

What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?

Apparently the poorest nations are the primary target for the population control freaks over at the UN.

This agenda showed up again when the United Nations Population Fund released its annual State of the World Population Report for 2009 entitled “Facing a Changing World: Women, Population and Climate“.

The following are three quotes that were pulled right out of that document….

1) “Each birth results not only in the emissions attributable to that person in his or her lifetime, but also the emissions of all his or her descendants. Hence, the emissions savings from intended or planned births multiply with time.”

2) “No human is genuinely “carbon neutral,” especially when all greenhouse gases are figured into the equation. Therefore, everyone is part of the problem, so everyone must be part of the solution in some way.”

3) “Strong family planning programmes are in the interests of all countries for greenhouse-gas concerns as well as for broader welfare concerns.”

If no human is “carbon neutral”, then what is the solution?

To those that are obsessed with Agenda 21 and “sustainable development”, the fact that you and I are alive and breathing air is a huge problem.

The population control agenda is also regularly showing up in our newspapers now.

In a recent editorial for the New York Times entitled “ The Earth Is Full“, Thomas L. Friedman made the following statement….

You really do have to wonder whether a few years from now we’ll look back at the first decade of the 21st century ­ when food prices spiked, energy prices soared, world population surged, tornados plowed through cities, floods and droughts set records, populations were displaced and governments were threatened by the confluence of it all ­ and ask ourselves: What were we thinking? How did we not panic when the evidence was so obvious that we’d crossed some growth/climate/natural resource/population redlines all at once?

But Friedman is quite moderate compared to many of the “eco-prophets” that are running around out there today.

For example, James Lovelock, the creator of the Gaia hypothesis, stated in an interview with the Guardian earlier this year that “democracy must be put on hold” if the fight against global warming is going to be successful and that only “a few people with authority” should be permitted to rule the planet until the crisis is solved.

A Finnish environmentalist named Pentti Linkola has gone even farther than that.  Linkola is openly calling for climate change deniers to be “re-educated”, for an eco-fascist world government to be established, for humans to be forcibly sterilized and for the majority of humans to be killed.

That doesn’t sound pleasant, now does it?

This agenda is even being taught by professors at our top universities.

The truth is that academia is brimming with nutjobs who want to see the vast majority of humans wiped out.

For example, Professor of Biology at the University of Texas at Austin Eric R. Pianka is a very prominent advocate of radical human population control.

In an article entitled “What nobody wants to hear, but everyone needs to know”, Pianka made the following shocking statements….

*First, and foremost, we must get out of denial and recognize that Earth simply cannot support many billions of people.

*This planet might be able to support perhaps as many as half a billion people who could live a sustainable life in relative comfort. Human populations must be greatly diminished, and as quickly as possible to limit further environmental damage.

*I do not bear any ill will toward humanity. However, I am convinced that the world WOULD clearly be much better off without so many of us.

Now keep in mind that this is a university professor that is teaching our kids.  People actually pay a lot of money to get educated by this guy.

If those pushing Agenda 21, “sustainable development” and population control get their way, the world is going to be a much different place in the future.

Just watch the video posted below.  It was originally produced by the Forum for the Future, a major NGO funded by big corporations such as Time Warner and Royal Dutch Shell.  In this video, the Forum for the Future presents their chilling version of the future.  Are you ready to live in a “Planned-opolis”?  Are you ready to use a “calorie card” and to have what you eat determined by a “global food council”?  This is the kind of tyrannical future that these radical environmental organizations want to impose on you and I….

Yes, the video is almost comical, but this is the kind of world that the global elite want to push us towards.

In fact, we see radical steps being taken all over the globe even now.

In Europe, the European Commission has unveiled a plan to ban all cars from major European cities by the year 2050.

In Europe, the mantra “carbon dioxide is causing global warming” has become gospel.  This banning of cars from city centers is all part of a draconian master plan to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in Europe by 60 percent over the next 40 years.

Hopefully this plan will never come to fruition, but the fact that the European Commission is seriously pushing it just shows how far things have progressed.

But we don’t have to peer into the future to see how this agenda is going to affect us.

Today, the U.S. government and governments all over the industrialized world have become so obsessed with reducing carbon emissions that now they even tell us what kinds of light bulbs we are allowed to buy.

There are millions of Americans that love the old light bulbs.  But soon we will not have the choice to buy them anymore.

What kind of freedom is that?

In some areas of the United States, government snoopers actually sort through the trash of residents to ensure that environmental rules are being followed.  For example, in the city of Cleveland, Ohio authorities have announced plans to have “trash supervisors” go snooping through trash cans to ensure that people are actually recycling according to city guidelines.

How would you feel if government officials went snooping around in your trash cans?

The world is changing.  The global elite have immense amounts of wealth and power and they are intent on imposing a radical environmental agenda on all the rest of us.

The reality is that many of the wealthiest and most prominent people in the world are absolutely obsessed with the green agenda and with population control.  Just consider the following quotes….

David Rockefeller: “The negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident.”

CNN Founder Ted Turner: “A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

Dave Foreman, Earth First Co-Founder: “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

Maurice Strong: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Michael Oppenheimer: “The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.”

This radical agenda is even represented in the White House.

John P. Holdren, Barack Obama’s top science advisor, co-authored a textbook entitled “Ecoscience” back in 1977 in which he actually advocated mass sterilization, compulsory abortion, a one world government and a global police force to enforce population control.

On page 837 of Ecoscience, a claim is made that compulsory abortion would be perfectly legal under the U.S. Constitution….

“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

On pages 942 and 943, a call is made for the creation of a “planetary regime” that would control the global economy and enforce population control measures….

“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime­sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.”

“The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”

On page 917, the surrender of U.S. national sovereignty to an international organization is advocated….

“If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.”

As mentioned earlier, Holdren is the number one science advisor to Barack Obama, and the truth is that the top levels of the U.S. government are packed with people that believe this stuff.

Yes, a lot of what you have read in this article sounds crazy.  But the global elite really do believe in population control and they really are seeking to implement a radical environmental agenda across the entire planet.

They want total control of everyone and everything so that they can impose the measures that they believe are necessary to “fix” the planet.

I have actually written quite extensively in the past about the radical green agenda of the global elite.  If you are interested in learning more, I would recommend the following articles….

* The Green Police

* Governments Around The World Are Eagerly Adopting The Strict Population Control Agenda Of The United Nations

* Yes, They Really Do Want To Reduce The Population – 22 Shocking Population Control Quotes From The Global Elite That Will Make You Want To Lose Your Lunch

* The Dangerous Myth Of Overpopulation

* One Less Child? Environmental Extremists Warn That Overpopulation Is Causing Climate Change And Will Ultimately Destroy The Earth

* Hillary Clinton: Population Control Will Now Become The Centerpiece Of U.S. Foreign Policy

* New U.N. Report: We Must Reduce The Population To Fight Climate Change

* The Population Control Agenda Behind The Global Warming Movement: For The Environmental Extremists At Copenhagen Population Reduction Is The “Cheapest” Way To Reduce Carbon Emissions

* To The Global Elite The Math Is Simple: Human Overpopulation Is Causing Climate Change So The Solution To Climate Change Is Population Control

Galatians 4:16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

“Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.”~Patrick Henry




John Pilger

06 24 11

One of the most original and provocative books of the past decade is Disciplined Minds by Jeff Schmidt (Rowman & Littlefield). “A critical look at salaried professionals,” says the cover, “and the soul-battering system that shapes their lives.” Its theme is postmodern America but also applies to Britain, where the corporate state has bred a new class of Americanised managers to run the private and public sectors: the banks, the main parties, corporations, important committees, the BBC.

Professionals are said to be meritorious and non-ideological. Yet, in spite of their education, writes Schmidt, they think less independently than non-professionals. They use corporate jargon – “model”, “performance”, “targets”, “strategic oversight”. In Disciplined Minds, Schmidt argues that what makes the modern professional is not technical knowledge but “ideological discipline”. Those in higher education and the media do “political work” but in a way that is not seen as political. Listen to a senior BBC person sincerely describe the nirvana of neutrality to which he or she has risen. “Taking sides” is anathema; and yet the modern professional knows never to challenge the “built-in ideology of the status quo”. What matters is the “right attitude”.

A key to training professionals is what Schmidt calls “assignable curiosity”. Children are naturally curious, but along the way to becoming a professional they learn that curiosity is a series of tasks assigned by others. On entering training, students are optimistic and idealistic. On leaving, they are “pressured and troubled” because they realise that “the primary goal for many is getting compensated sufficiently for sidelining their original goals”. I have met many young people, especially budding journalists, who would recognise themselves in this description. For no matter how indirect its effect, the primary influence of professional managers is the extreme political cult of money worship and inequality known as neoliberalism.

The ultimate professional manager is Bob Diamond, the CEO of Barclays Bank in London, who got a £6.5m bonus in March. More than 200 Barclays managers took home £554m in total last year. In January, Diamond told the Commons Treasury select committee that “the time for remorse is over”. He was referring to the £1trn of public money handed unconditionally to corrupted banks by a Labour government whose leader, Gordon Brown, had described such “financiers” as his personal “inspiration”.

This was the final act of corporate coup d’état, now disguised by a specious debate about “cuts” and a “national deficit”. The most humane premises of British life are to be eliminated. The “value” of the cuts is said to be £83bn, almost exactly the amount of tax legally avoided by the banks and corporations. That the British public continues to give the banks an additional annual subsidy of £100bn in free insurance and guarantees – a figure that would fund the entire National Health Service – is suppressed.

So, too, is the absurdity of the very notion of “cuts”. When Britain was officially bankrupt following the Second World War, there was full employment and some of its greatest public institutions, such as the Health Service, were built. Yet “cuts” are managed by those who say they oppose them and manufacture consent for their wider acceptance. This is the role of the Labour Party’s professional managers.

In matters of war and peace, Schmidt’s disciplined minds promote violence, death and mayhem on a scale still unrecognised in Britain. In spite of damning evidence to the Chilcot inquiry by the former intelligence chief Major General Michael Laurie, the “core business” manager, Alastair Campbell, remains at large, as do all the other war managers who toiled with Blair and at the Foreign Office to justify and sell the beckoning bloodbath in Iraq.

The reputable media play a critical often subtle role. Frederick Ogilvie, who succeeded the BBC’s founder, Lord Reith, as director general, wrote that his goal was to turn the BBC into a “fully effective instrument of war”. Ogilvie would have been delighted with his 21st-century managers. In the run-up to the Iraq invasion, the BBC’s coverage overwhelmingly echoed the government’s mendacious position, as studies by the University of Wales and Media Tenor show.

However, the great Arab uprising cannot be easily managed, or appropriated, with omissions and caveats, as an exchange on the BBC’s Today programme on 16 May made clear. With his celebrated professionalism, honed in corporate speeches, John Humphrys interviewed a Palestinian spokesman, Husam Zomlot, following Israel’s massacre of unarmed demonstrators on the 63rd anniversary of the illegal expulsion of the Palestinian people from their homes.

Humphrys: . . . it’s not surprising that Israel reacted the way it did, is it?

Zomlot: . . . I am very proud and glad [they were] peacefully marching only to . . . really to draw attention to their 63-year plight.

Humphrys: But they did not march peacefully, that’s my point . . .

Zomlot: None of them . . . was armed . . . [They were] opposed to Israeli tanks and helicopters and F-16s. You cannot even start to compare the violence . . . This is not a security matter . . . [the Israelis] always fail to deal with such a purely political, humanitarian, legal matter . . .

Humphrys: Sorry to interrupt you there but . . . if I marched into your house waving a club and throwing a stone at you then it would be a security matter, wouldn’t it?

Zomlot: I beg your pardon. According to the United Nations Security Council resolutions, those people are marching to their homes; they have the deeds of their homes; it’s their private property. So let’s set the record right once and for all . . .

It was a rare moment. Setting the record straight is not a managerial “target”.

The comprehensive Annual Financial Report and the Tax Retirement Fund

06/25/2011  and  http://Tax­­­­­


This article archived-


Tim and Scott:

I have found analogies work well to get a point across. The big issue is that government has taken over “all” forms of racketeering and expanded the profit margin 20x fold. Gambling; the numbers; alcohol; and other vices such as tobacco. Trailers of cash roll in the door each day for government more so than organized crime ever dreamed about from the same.

Government has worked on the basis of greed and opportunity for the last ten-thousand years and has pushed the envelope at every opportunity to do so. Outside of the “promoted” rhetoric given the public to justify their involvement the final effect and end result of the before mentioned takeovers have been crystal clear; using the population as a productivity resource to be drained and managed.

In the same light per banking and investment “modern” collective government a hundred years ago started the process to “capture” the profit from this arena through increased investment in the same to as of today collective government is the “primary” investor in that arena globally. To do so it was imperative that the public remain oblivious to the scope and size of the expansion and takeover in this arena. Under communism the government openly professed to “own it all”. If the public here knew the same was taking place the push come to shove civil war revolution would have sparked forty-years ago. As a very effective tactic used to prevent that occurrence, the decades of masterful entertainment and controlled information management began: “”feed the public bullshit and grow the end result of mushrooms kept in the dark” This was the key reason the CAFR (government’s Annual Financial Report) was never mentioned over the last sixty-years, it showed “in its collective totals” the takeover in progress a little bit by little bit each and every year.

Well, the bottom line as of 1999 was that Government “did” take it all over by investment. The banks; brokerage; and insurance industry was the effective conduit that government required to do so. That industry participated eagerly over the last century also out of greed and opportunity. Government was where the money was. Government institutional investment capital was the coveted prize to assure massive profits for both sides of the coin. Expansion of those globally managed government institutional funds perpetuated “massive” wealth every year for those involved. Additionally the private sector corporate community cooperated and was eager to participate based on “who” was to get their capital from that collective government institutional investment wealth base. Who from the corporate world was going to kick the Goose that was laying the golden eggs of investment capitalization?

In the 80’s – 90’s Russia saw the errors of their ways in face of the USA model for government takeover and control and modified their principle of operation to do the same. Come the year 2000 even China realized the government “corporate” model operating in the United States was more effective in end result for government expansion; wealth generation; and absolute control. They as Russia did modified their presentation of policy to their population also to join the family of “One New World Corporate Order” of government ownership by investment for ultimate population control.

Hey, now that I have distracted you readers from the Simpsons; Family Guy; the championship sports game; if OJ will ever get out of jail;  if Tiger will have a relapse of his sex addiction; or if your phone bill is to high, did the clear exposure given above have an impact on your cognitive thinking?

Per the issue that I am replying to of concern: “State (government) Run Banks”, in the scheme of things it is just a step of evolution in line with government control and profit. An important step for consolidation. You see as government took it all over by investment they needed the banks; brokerage; and insurance companies to facilitate the takeover for them. Now that they have done so, who needs the middle-man?

What we saw transpire in the world economy since 2000 were the death throngs of a capitalist world as all were thrown into a frenzy of who was going to steal the most the fastest while they still could. The writing was on the wall for for consolidation of complete and absolute government control over all finance / investment operations down the road and done so globally. Just like a pack of dogs who saw the last opportunity for a last big meal, the chaos for manipulated massive wealth transfer went into effect. That old adage of: “If rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it” came to play on and after 911 and then with the market bubble of 2008. Massive wealth transfer took place and those dogs eagerly grabbed the biggest chunks of meat they could get their teeth into.

The wealth transfer took place in two primary fashions: Market profits (in the tens of trillions of dollars) from the manipulations / event orchestrations and by trillion dollar giveaways to the institutional participants at taxpayer expense and liability.

The push for state run banks will come to a fever pitch in the near future and in fact the logic used by government to do so will be expounding on the need to sure-up on the tottering economy and increasing the profit of your local government. Again, “cut out the middle man”. Problem caused and self created solution provided. Or: opportunity presented, greed satisfied.

The other aspect of the takeover has been “information management”. Government has been having fun testing the aspects of what information we are spoon fed. This ranges from the absurd to: “it is imperative that we act now” and everything in between. The intent behind most of this is population control and management to effect the desired end result of the end game, complete control and management for ultimate profit for collective government.

Keep in mind it is just opportunity and the ability to effect the end result using what are now normal corporate marketing tactic. Now our grand-fathers and great-grand-fathers may be locking and loading at this point but they were not conditioned as we were to accept our fate from an inevitable overpowering force. We have been conditions as is the plot line of every show we are saturated with like Cops; Judge Judy; stories on the nightly news to: Shut up, follow instructions; do what you are told. Our descendents were not subject to the very refined government – corporate masterful entertainment and conditioned responses that we are subject to today. Their independence; freedoms; and most important of all – ability to independently act were not as fettered as they are on all of us today. We are the new definition of a controlled and managed society.

State run banks? In my opinion: Not a good idea for us. Great idea for the profit of corporate government but not for US.

What is the one factor that has been missing from this picture of government vs. the population over the last ten-thousand years?

ANS: The public has never been the “first-line-beneficiary” of the wealth. They have always been an afterthought, appeased with whatever rhetoric or sideline special program that was necessary to perpetuate the government intent of control and takeover of it all due to the money involved. Again just simple and unrestrained (for all intents and purposes) greed and opportunity at play. Four-thousand years ago the Pharaohs did it and today our congress and senate is in the same mode of intent in a diversity of thousands of issues all decided along the lines in end result of furthering government control and wealth generation.

But who am I to say these things and expect the population to effect permanent change to modify our government to make the population the first-line-beneficiary of the wealth? I am but only just one man who is only 55 years old and very tired.

Now I know for sure that our grand-fathers and great-grand-fathers would have stopped; thought about; and acted upon with whatever force was necessary to make the people of the United States the first-line-beneficiary of the wealth. But then again they were not conditioned as we have been to: Shut up, follow instructions; do what you are told.

So how can this change / modification come to be?

It is required to get the cooperation and intent applied of all three power groups of the world to make it happen. The Financial Cartels; the Population; and Government. What can motivate all three groups with a impassioned driving force to make this happen?

In answer to that question let’s just stay to the basics that have worked all so well over the millenniums: Greed and opportunity.

I brought forward last year what makes the population first-line-beneficiary of the wealth. I called it the TRF –

From all views and from all directions of perspective it is a win-win for all three power groups “and” creates a thriving economy for the next one-thousand years. (and no taxation to boot).

I have good news: The pot is a stirring! Government officials from different locations from across the country have been considering implementing the TRF. They do so in quite contemplation and behind closed doors at this time. They know the wrath of the corruption from easy money by taxation will come down on them with an iron foot if their thinking was known. Their successes in secret have been noteworthy. Their ranks are growing and their contact discussions with the financial cartels have been productive. The population may not be aware of this but then: Loose lips sink ships”. You see that greed and opportunity principle has a long-term ability to be satisfied within the principle of operation of the TRF and it “is” a win-win for all “globally”.

I now know it is not an issue of “if” but an issue of “when” the TRF will be given birth.

The ice-breaker that is bringing it forth is reliant on the following most important aspect of all:  For the last ten-thousand years government has viewed the population as a productivity resource to be drained and managed. This has never nor will ever be a good thing. Government under the operation of the TRF changes their intent to see the population as wealthy and as prosperous as they can be, and yes that is a good thing.

The better the population is doing the more “stable” truck loads of cash come rolling in to the government; financial cartels; and the population’s coffers. Again a win-win for all involved and a prosperous economy. An economy run and driven by cash and investment only. Taxation is phased out of the picture in its entirety replaced by global investment income under the operation of TRF(s).

What I smile at is the fact that the destructive greed and opportunity played out over the last decade has now motivated the TRF to come forth with explosive birth. Tic-tic-tic, are you getting ready for the explosion to happen in your city, state, of county? Our conditioning to Shut up, follow instructions; do what you are told is getting a little old and very counterproductive to our true interests. (from genuine spirits contained within all three global groups of our interests)

Sent FYI from and truly yours,
Walter Burien – CAFR1
P. O. Box 2112
Saint Johns, AZ 85936

Tel. (928) 458-5854

Websites:  and  http://Tax­­­­­

Any local government can be restructured to meet their annual budget needs “Without” taxes. TRF (Tax Retirement Funds) paying for every City, County, State’s annual budgetary needs!
To automatically subscribe to CAFR1 NATIONAL posts –

A Leadership Review of the Barack Obama Administration


The August Review

Global Elite Research Center

A Leadership Review of the Barack Obama Administration

By Carl Teichrib

March 9. 2009

After endless months of campaigning, mud-slinging, and grandiose political promises, the American presidential elections are now in the rear-view mirror.

President Barack Obama, a man with seemingly unquenchable energy and fantastic oratory skills, promised America – and the world – that his administration would be different. Change would be the hallmark of a new era in American politics.

However, looking at the administration team as it currently stands, it’s hard to find too many substantial changes. Instead, it appears that Obama has followed the path of other US presidents – filling the chairs with deeply entrenched political elites.

This report attempts to provide a biographical window into those who are taking the leading offices in America. By better grasping the political networks of those on the Obama team, you’ll be better equipped to understand the direction this administration is going. Moreover, many of these networks, or political organizations, espouse an internationalist worldview. Hence, this leadership list report will be a useful tool in discerning the motives for future political actions.

Please note: The focus of this leadership review isn’t on the individual’s educational background or family ties –which are typically part of a person’s biography. Rather, the primary objective of this list is to highlight the numerous connections between Obama officials and the various elite-centered associations found in America’s economic and political landscape.

Even before Barack Obama’s inauguration, special interest groups were meeting with key Obama transition team members in the hopes of swaying the administration’s long term planning. One example is Eric P. Schwartz and the Citizens for Global Solutions.

Citizens for Global Solutions, formerly known as the World Federalist Association, is America’s largest pro-world government organization. In early December 2008, CGS Don Kraus met with Eric Schwartz, a member of Obama’s transition team who is in charge of the US/United Nations relationship.  Schwartz also handles National Security Policy transition issues. On the table were a host of issues, from reinstating the United States within the International Criminal Court system to supporting the expansion of the UN Department of Political Affairs.

While these issues are not the prime goals of Citizens for Global Solutions (a world federal government is the main objective), the very fact that the Obama US/UN transition team would solicit the advice of CGS is problematic.

Schwartz himself is representative of those who are part of the “Obama-difference” in America’s new government. Consider his connections.

– Member, Council on Foreign Relations: The CFR is recognized as one of the most elite foreign policy organizations in America, and it historically has been associated with advocating internationalism.

– Executive Director, Connect US Fund: Established in part by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, this grant-making body promotes international interdependence, especially as it relates to America’s engagement in foreign affairs.

– Has been active in United Nations reform issues. This included working with the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, a high-level group who was tasked with fleshing out the boundaries between what the international community can do militarily, verses the rights and roles of the state.

(This is part of what is called R2P – the Right to Protect; it’s an idea that opens up a host of dilemmas in terms of national sovereignty and global governance).

Now consider who’s involved in the heart of the Obama administration – Hilary Clinton, Joe Biden, General James L. Jones, and Susan Rice. And these are just a sampling of the top leaders who are linked, in one-way or another, to a global governance agenda. In fact, when you examine the Obama leadership team, you stumble into a smorgasbord of politically elite favorites, tied to organizations that promote international management.

Here’s a few of the primary organizations you’ll find throughout this leadership list

(NOTE: brief explanations on these organizations are given below as well as within the report).

– American Security Project: The ASP holds that America should be the world manager in relations to the global commons – that includes international sea-lanes, air space, and even the global marketplace. For more details on the ASP, see the listing for Secretary of State Special Envoy, George J. Mitchell.

– Aspen Institute/Aspen Study Group: An influential think tank/forum that historically promotes global governance, interfaithism, and education for world citizenship.A Leadership Review

– Atlantic Council of the United States: A powerful body that supports NATO’s empowerment as a global force and deeper ties between the European political community and the United States.

– Bilderberg Group: A secretive club of the world’s top political and financial actors.

Bilderberg is known as a trend-setting/agenda-developing group; a type of international “chess master.”

– Bretton Woods Committee: A club of top ranking political leaders and financial players who seek a revamped international financial system built on the foundations of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

–  Brookings Institute: A major, Washington DC-based policy think tank that has a long history of promoting regional and international governance.

–  Center for Strategic and International Studies: CSIS is an extremely influential policy group and research body that has promoted North American/hemispheric integration, and the development of global governance structures.

– Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: The CEIP is a global think tank with offices in Washington DC, Moscow, Beijing, Beirut, and Brussels. It supports international approaches to security and political issues, and offers advice to the leaders of the world. CEIP promotes global collective security – the idea that internationalsecurity should be guaranteed and maintained by a world structure.

– Council on Foreign Relations: America’s premier, elite policy think tank with a longstanding tradition of supporting international aspirations.

– International Institute for Strategic Studies: A British research group that focuses on global security and military concerns. The IISS has been a supporter of an empowered international system of governance.

– Trilateral Commission: The TC is a small but powerful group of world leaders who come from three main parts of the globe: North America, Europe, and Asia. The Trilateral program is deeply internationalist in scope – advocating global management and regional unification (including a North American community).

The List

Obviously there will be some additions and deletions to this list as time progresses. However, at the point of this article’s completion, the following individuals are viewed as key components within the Obama administration. Further note that this list is not complete, as there are many others in transition team positions and other offices that have been missed (this is simply due to time and space constraints on the part of the author).

While some individuals may be overlooked, this list does cover the majority of cabinet positions. A Leadership Review

Wherever possible, the author has used primary source materials and authoritative information in compiling this list.  Some biographical data comes from the Fund to Restore an Educated Electorate (F.R.E.E.), a group that has done a remarkable job over the years in compiling political membership lists.

The order in which the names in this list occur is as follows:

– Vice President: Joe Biden

– Department of State: Hilary R. Clinton

– Deputy Secretary of State: James Steinberg

– Assistant Secretary of State, Asia and Pacific: Kurt M. Campbell

– State Department, Special Envoy: Richard Haass

– State Department, Special Envoy: Dennis Ross

– State Department, Special Envoy: Richard Holbrooke

– State Department, Special Envoy: George J. Mitchell

– Department of the Treasury: Timothy F. Geithner

– Department of Defense: Robert M. Gates

– Department of Energy: Steven Chu

– Department of the Interior: Ken Salazar

– Department of Education: Arne Duncan

– Department of Health and Human Services: Tom Daschle (see the note for this listing)

– Department of Agriculture: Tom Vilsack

– Department of Transportation: Ray LaHood

– Department of Labor: Hilda Solis

– Department of Housing and Urban Development: Shaun Donovan

– Department of Veterans Affairs: Eric K. Shinseki

– Department of Commerce: Judd Gregg

– Department of Homeland Security: Janet Napolitano

– Attorney General: Eric Holder

– National Security Advisory: General James L. Jones

– Deputy National Security Advisor: Tom Donilon

– Director of National Intelligence: Dennis Blair

– Director of the Central Intelligence Agency: Leon Panetta

– White House Chief of Staff: Rahm Emanuel

– White House Military Office: Louis Caldera

– Ambassador to the Untied Nations: Susan Rice

– Domestic Policy Council: Melody Barnes

– US Trade Representative: Ron Kirk

– National Economic Council: Lawrence Summers

– Council of Economic Advisors: Christina Romer

– Economic Recovery Committee: Paul Volker

– Office of Management and Budget: Peter Orszag

– Securities and Exchange Commission: Mary Schapiro

– Council on Environmental Quality: Nancy Sutley

– Environmental Protection Agency: Lisa P. Jackson

– Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change: Carol Browner

– Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnership: Joshua DuBois

Vice President: Joe Biden

There are numerous references to Mr. Biden as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission via secondary sources, however, the author of this report could not find any official biography – either in print or online – that mentioned his membership as a fact. That he has been involved in the CFR is not in dispute, as he has participated in many CFR events and is looked upon with great respect by the organization. 2De facto membership information, however, wasn’t available.

In the past Mr. Biden has been the Co-Chair of the Senate NATO Observer Group, and has held prominent positions in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security.

In 1992 Biden gave three days of testimony to the US Senate on an agenda for global affairs. The speech, titled “On the Threshold of the New World Order,” advocated international collective security, global democracy, and “launching a worldwide economic-environmental revolution.”

His vision was an America that led the way in global management. According to FREE, Joe Biden is linked to the Bilderberg Group.

Department of State: Hillary Rodham Clinton

If one were to flesh out Mrs. Clinton’s complete bio – listing all of her connections, policy recommendations, and points of contention – you would have a substantial sized book. For the sake of this article, we will focus briefly on global governance issues.

Although Hillary Clinton isn’t a member of the Trilateral Commission or the Council on Foreign Relations (although she has attended CFR events), he husband – former President of the United States, William J. Clinton – has been involved with both. Bill Clinton has also been associated with other internationalist-type organizations, such as the Club of Madrid. Moreover, he founded the Clinton Global Initiative, a program that advocates global governance.

Does Mrs. Clinton share these same values? In 1999, she sent an official video congratulating Walter Cronkite on his being given the World Federalist Association Global Governance Award. “For decades you’ve told us the way it is, and tonight we honor you for fighting for the way it could be…”

“The way it could be”? The World Federalist Association, now known as Citizens for Global Solutions, is the largest pro-world government advocacy group in the United States. Moreover, Walter Cronkite’s speech, and the very premise for being given this award, revolved around an open endorsement of world government. In the past, William Clinton issued a similar statement of support when his friend, Strobe Talbot, received the same WFA recognition. Hillary and her husband have been Bilderberg Group participants.

Deputy Secretary of State: James Steinberg

This section of Mr. Steinberg’s bio comes from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs,

“From December 1996 to August 2000, he served as deputy national security advisor to President Bill Clinton. During that period he also served as the president’s personal representative (“Sherpa”) to the 1998 and 1999 G-8 summits. Prior to becoming deputy national security advisor, he served as chief of staff of the U.S. State Department and director of the State Department’s policy planning staff (1994-1996), and as deputy assistant secretary for analysis in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research (1993-1994).”

Steinberg’s connections into the global community are striking. – Former Senior Fellow with the International Institute for Strategic Studies – a British organization that provides recommendations and research on international security issues. – Former Senior Analyst at RAND Corporation – a powerful military and governancethink-tank. – Former member of the Brookings Institute – a highly influential Washington DC research institute that has historically promoted international governance andregionalism. – Current board member of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientist’s Science and Security Board. The BAS has been a promoter of United Nations security empowerment, and it endorses global governance solutions for a host of major issues. Presently, the BAS is recommending that the Obama administration reinstate an independent Arms Control and Disarmament Agency – a Cold War-era federal agency that actively encouraged the disbanding of national militaries and the creation of a United Nations standing army. – Current director with the Pacific Council on International Policy. The PCIP focuses on building a network of “globally-oriented business, civic and government leaders.”  The PCIP was founded in 1995 as a Council on Foreign Relations partnership organization. – Member of the senior advisory council of The American Assembly’s Next Generation Project. This is a program that explores America’s role in globalization and how international institutions (United Nations, etc) can be reformed to meet the challenges ofthe new century. – Board of advisors at the Center for a New American Security. The Center advocates a renewed American interest in developing world order, including “an infrastructure of global social services.” This think tank recommends that America should reinstate itself as the primary vehicle for the “management of globalization.”- Board of advisors of The Yale Journal of International Law. – Member of the Aspen Study Group, a division of the Aspen Institute. The Aspen program is noted for its internationalist perspective, including the advocacy of global governance, interfaith spirituality, and the role of education for world citizenship. Seeing these many connections, it’s no surprise to learn that James Steinberg is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and has been involved with the Bilderberg Group.

Assistant Secretary of State, Asia & Pacific: Kurt M. Campbell (expected)

Although Mr. Campbell hasn’t been officially placed in this position, his name has surfaced as the top candidate for the job. Under the Clinton administration, Campbell was the Assistant Secretary of State for Asia/Pacific. He was also the director of the National Security Council Staff, a presidential counselor on NAFTA, and a White House commissioned fellow at the Department of the Treasury. He is also deeply entrenched as an elite player in America’s foreign policy and internationalist community. A Leadership Review

– CEO of the Center for a New American Security (see James Steinberg’s bio above for

information on this group).

– Director of the Aspen Strategy Group. – Past director with the Center for Strategic and International Studies; one of the most powerful Washington-based think tanks on global security issues, international management, and the development of hemispheric/continental unification. – Member, International Institute for Strategic Studies. – Member, Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission.

State Department, Special Envoy: Richard Haass

While Haass isn’t yet appointed, it is expected that Hillary Clinton will tap Mr. Haass for a special envoy position. In the past he was the US Department of State Director of Policy Planning (a very influential role), Special Assistant to President George H. W. Bush, and the Senior Director for Near East and South Asian Affairs with the National Security Council. Haass is the quintessential Washington elitist. – President, Council on Foreign Relations. – Past director at the Brookings Institute. – Past Senior Associate with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; a program that advocates global security under an enhanced international management regime (an empowered United Nations). – Associated with the Aspen Institute. – Involved with the Bilderberg Group. – Connected to the International Institute for Strategic Studies. – Involved with the World Economic Forum (an elite financial and political forum where leaders can network and develop agendas for the global economy).

State Department, Special Envoy: Dennis Ross

In the past, Ross was the Director of Policy Planning at the State Department under Georg Bush Sr., and Middle East coordinator under President Clinton. And over the years he’s worked closely on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, German unification, and the creation of the Gulf War coalition. During the Reagan years he held the Near East directorship in the National Security Council.

Past and current memberships include.

– Washington Institute for Near East Policy: A research group that advances America’s role in the Middle East. According to the organization’s website,“Drawing on the research of its scholars and the experience of policy practitioners, the Institute promotes an American engagement in the Middle East committed to strengthening alliances, nurturing friendships, and promoting security, peace, prosperity, and democracy for the people of the region.” – Council on Foreign Relations. – Aspen Institute. – Bilderberg Group. and the – Trilateral Commission.

State Department, Special Envoy, Richard Holbrooke

Holbrooke was appointed State Department Envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan under the Obama administration. In the past Mr. Holbrooke was the US Ambassador to Germany, Assistant Secretary of State, Assistant Secretary for European and Canadian Affairs, and US Ambassador to theUnited Nations. He has also been involved in a myriad of foreign operations, includingthe Vietnam War peace negotiations and NATOs engagement in the Balkans (he was directly involved in the Dayton Peace Accords). Mr. Holbrooke has also been involved in international banking, working as a senior advisor to Lehman Brothers and becoming Vice Chair for Credit Suisse First Boston. Moreover, while at the United Nations he brokered the deal to pay off America’s arrears to the UN (almost $1 billion). He is also connected to the private equity firm, Perseus LLC, and the insurance giant, American International Group. Past and present memberships include, – Board member, Council on Foreign Relations. – Advisory board member for the National Security Network: The NSN is a progressive body working to restore America’s leading role in world affairs and international management. “We will once more make America the preeminent global force for peace and prosperity.”- Member, Bretton Woods Committee: This is a group of high level financial and political leaders who seek to revamp and empower the Bretton Woods system, which includes the World Bank, the International Monetary Fun, the World Trade Organization, and numerous regional development banks. – Member of the Bilderberg Group. – Member, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. – Member, International Institute for Strategic Studies. – Member, Trilateral Commission.

State Department, Special Envoy: George J. Mitchell

Mr. Mitchell has been awarded the position of Special Envoy for the Middle East. In the past he’s been the Special Envoy for Northern Ireland. Other government offices held include US Attorney for Maine, US District Judge for Maine, and he was elected as a US Senator. He was also a member of the Select Committee on the Iran-Contra Affair. Mitchell has a long corporate history, serving with Disney, DLA Piper, FedEx, Staples, Starwood Hotels, Xerox and more. Memberships, past and present, are numerous. – Council on Foreign Relations. – Bilderberg Group. – Bretton Woods Committee. – American Security Project: A Washington DC organization that focuses on international security concerns. The ASP views America as the prime manager in what it calls “the new global commons.” That is, the world’s oceans and sea routes, international airspace, outer space, cyberspace, and “the emerging global market.” In one ASP document it goes so far as to suggest that the US military, heading up a coalition with Russia and China, could become “a force optimized for such a [global commons] strategy,” allowing American leadership to take on the “new role of global integrative systems manager.” – The Economic Club of Washington, DC: A forum where prominent national and international business, banking, and political/diplomatic leaders can gather to network and express views on the global and national economy. Mitchell was the president of this club from 1998-2004. – Campaign for American Leadership in the Middle East: A national campaign to promote America’s involvement in critical Middle Eastern issues, primarily in endorsing a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. – International Crisis Group: (Mitchell was the ICG’s first chairman) The ICG is a massively networked security and conflict watchdog organization that is deeply tied to the United Nations, the European Union, the World Bank, and other multinational bodies. This organization monitors global hotspots and offers policy recommendations for players in the international community. The ICG promotes United Nations enforcement capabilities.

Department of the Treasury: Timothy F. Geithner

Geithner is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and was director of a CFR Task Force on trade policy. He’s also been part of the Bilderberg Group, and has connection to the Rand Corporation (a military/intelligence think tank), and the Center for Strategic & International Studies.  A Leadership Review From 2001-2003, he was the Director of the Policy Development and Review Department at the International Monetary Fund. He was also the president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. While in this capacity he became Vice Chairmanof the Federal Open Market Committee, and in 2006 became a member of the Group of Thirty – an elite body of world financiers, bankers, and economists (the G30 started through a Rockefeller Foundation initiative). In the past he’s worked for Kissinger and Associates, and was the Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs. Geithner has surrounded himself with an informal group of advisors who are Trilateral and CFR members, including Alan Greenspan (former Chair of the Federal Reserve and the one who is, arguably, the most responsible for the current economic crisis) and Paul Volker (former Fed Reserve Chairman who supports a single world currency).

Department of Defense: Robert M. Gates

Robert Gates has a long history within the intelligence community, rising through the ranks of the Central Intelligence Agency to eventually become the Director of the CIA under the presidency of William Clinton. He was also the Deputy National Security Advisor for George H.W. Bush. Gates does have known ties to the Council on Foreign Relations, having worked with a CFR task force on Iran. He’s also a member of the Forum for International Policy, an elite group of experts who advise policy makers on global affairs. According to FREE, Gates has connections with the Bilderberg Group. Department of Energy: Steven Chu Winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics and past Director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Chu is a current member of the Copenhagen Climate Council. The CCC is a body of international business and science leaders who work to support the United Nations Climate Summit, which is to take place in late November 2009. (CCC is working on a new, more robust global climate agreement to replace the soon-expiring Kyoto Protocol.) Under the Obama administration, Mr. Chu will advance global warming policies; this will probably include an international carbon trade market. There are no known connections between Mr. Chu and the CFR or Trilateral Commission.

Department of the Interior: Ken Salazar

There appears to be no connections between Mr. Salazar and the CFR, Trilateral Commission, or Bilderberg Group. The Secretary of the Interior oversees the National Park Service, the Minerals Management Services, the Bureau of Land Management, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. This position also oversees petroleum drilling programs and endangered species regulations.

Department of Education: Arne Duncan

Previously Mr. Duncan was the CEO of the Chicago Public School system and is a Harvard graduate. He appears to be independent of many of the politically elite associations typically found in Washington circles.

Department of Health and Human Services: Tom Daschle

NOTE: As this issue was being finalized, Tom Daschle announced that he was stepping down from this office, due to his tax problems. However, by including Daschle in this article, you will be given an insight into some different aspects of power politics via global “democracy.” Daschle is a long-time politician and Washington insider, serving as a South Dakota senator from 1987 until 2005. He has connections with the Bilderberg Group, and according to FREE he’s a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Daschle is further linked to a number of major organizations. – Center for American Progress: CAP advocates empowering the United Nations and the advancement of global warming policies at the international level. – National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI): The NDI is the Democratic Party-branch of the government-created National Endowment for Democracy

(NED). This organization promotes democracy at the global level, which for all intentand-purposes appears benevolent. However, the NDI/NED have been engaged in questionable activities in the carrying out of this duty.

Barbara Conry, a foreign policy analyst, provides a critical review of NDI’s parent body and primary funder, the National Endowment for Democracy. “The National Endowment for Democracy is a foreign policy loose cannon. Promoting democracy is a nebulous objective that can be manipulated to justify any whim of the special-interest groups – the Republican and Democratic parties, organized labor, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – that control most of NED’s funds. As those groups execute their own foreign policies, they often work against American interests and meddle needlessly in the affairs of other countries, undermining the democratic movements NED was designed to assist… NED, which also has a history of corruption and financial mismanagement, is superfluous at best and often destructive. Through the endowment, the American taxpayer has paid for special-interest groups to harass the duly elected governments of friendly countries, interfere in foreign elections, and foster the corruption of democratic movements.”

Furthermore, the National Democratic Institute is an “Associated Organization” of the Socialist International – a global body comprised of extreme leftist political parties that collectively advocate a socialist system of international management.

Department of Agriculture: Tom Vilsack

Vilsack was the Governor of Iowa, and is a former member of the National Governors Association Executive Committee. He was also chairman of the Democratic Governors Association. Mr. Vilsack does have direct connections to the Council on Foreign Relations, as he was the co-chair of a CFR task force report on national security and oil dependency (the other co-chair was former CIA Director John Deutch).

Department of Transportation: Ray LaHood

Former Congressman from the 18th District of Illinois. He appears to be independent of many of the elite associations often found in Washington circles.

Department of Labor: Hilda Solis

Former Congresswoman representing California’s 32nd District. She does not appear to be involved with any of the typical, elite political associations found in foreign policy circles. If she does have a connection into the realm of global governance, it would be through her appointment to the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe – an influential, multinational organization that focuses on collective security issues.

Department of Housing and Urban Development: Shaun Donovan

Former Commissioner of the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development under Mayor Michael Bloomberg. According to his New York City Department of Housing bio, “Before joining the Bloomberg administration, Mr. Donovan worked at Prudential Mortgage Capital Company as managing director of its FHA lending and affordable housing investments.  In the affordable housing arena, Prudential Mortgage Capital’s portfolio totaled more than $1.5 billion in debt, including Fannie Mae, FHA and other loan types. Prior to Prudential, Mr. Donovan was a visiting scholar at New York University, where he researched and wrote about the preservation of federallyassisted housing.  He was also a consultant to the Millennial Housing Commission on strategies for increasing the production of multifamily housing. The Commission was created by the United States Congress to recommend ways to expand housing opportunities across the nation.” Mr. Donovan has no known direct connections to the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, or any other similar organization.

Department of Veterans Affairs: Eric K. Shinseki

Mr. Shinseki has been involved in military command services since 1996, holding the positions of Army Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations and Plans), Commanding General US Army Europe, Army Vice Chief of Staff, and US Army Chief of Staff. He has many corporate connections, acting as a board member for BancWest, First Hawaiian Bank, Guardian Life Insurance, and Honeywell. – Member, Council on Foreign Relations. – Director with the Atlantic Council of the United States: An elite, pro-NATO group that builds policy consensus between Europe and the United States, and works to strengthen NATO’s role as a global force. It also envisions NATO as a binding structure within a new trans-Atlantic partnership dubbed the Atlantic Compact, a framework that seeks to tighten economic and security ties between Europe and North America. The organization also offers policy options as it relates to Russia, China, Japan, and other Asian nations.

Department of Commerce: Judd Gregg

Mr. Gregg has been a long-time player in governmental circles. He was elected as a Congressman in 1980, held the position of Governor for New Hampshire, and was elected to the US Senate in 1993. Over the years he has held numerous postings such as the Chair of the US Senate Committee on Budget, the Congressional Oversight Panel,Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, and Chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee. Environmental groups have hailed Mr. Gregg as a green leader. He is promoting the creation of a 100,000-acre wildness zone that straddles New Hampshire and Vermont. There doesn’t appear to be any direct linkage between Mr. Gregg, the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, or the Bilderberg Group.

Department of Homeland Security: Janet Napolitano

Napolitano is the former Governor of Arizona, she’s also a former US Attorney under Janet Reno in the Clinton Administration. FREE lists her as a CFR member.

Attorney General: Eric Holder

Mr. Holder was a Justice Department official under the Clinton administration, and acted as a legal advisor to Obama’s presidential campaign. Holder’s history is sobering for gun owners in America, as he has vigorously opposed firearm ownership and has endorsed the creation of a national gun-registry database. (In Canada, similar gun registry laws have not been effective in crime control, and have been extremely costly and overly bureaucratic. If anything, Canada’s gun control program has done much more in removing the ability of individuals to protect themselves instead of hampering actual criminal activity.) Regarding the Trilateral Commission and/or CFR; there are no official connections to Mr. Holder that the author of this report is aware of.

National Security Advisor: Gen. James L. Jones

Retired Marine General James L. Jones was the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. During his final assignment, General Jones advocated that a core part of NATO’s mandate should include energy security. He also wished to see NATO further involved in Africa, including support roles for the African Union, and in 2008 he advocated replacing Israeli forcing in the West Bank with NATO troops, who would in turn hand over full security control to the Palestinian Authority. During the Bush administration, General Jones was appointed Middle East Security Envoy by Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. He was also asked by Rice to take the position of Deputy Secretary of State, which he declined. General Jones is very well connected. His positions have included, – Chairman of the Atlantic Council of the United States. – President of the Institute for 21st Century Energy: This is an arm of the US Chamber of Commerce charged with unifying energy policymakers with the business community.

The Institute recognizes that energy and climate change are global issues, and must be addressed at the international level. – Member of the board of directors for Boeing, Chevron, and Invacare Corporation. – Trustee, Center for Strategic and International Studies: CSIS is, in many respects, one of the most powerful foreign affairs institutions in Washington DC. It is heavy connected to the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. Moreover, it has been very active in developing recommendations and directives that work towards unifying North America – and the Western Hemisphere – into a single economic/trading block. – Member of the Project on National Security Reform: The PNSR is an influential group that recommends policies and directives with the aim of reforming the national security architecture. The PNSR motto is “Transforming Government for the 21st Century.” Mr. Jones is a Trilateral Commission member, according to the TC’s 2009 membership list. And, according to FREE, he has connections with the Bildergerg Group.

Deputy National Security Adviser: Tom Donilon

Mr. Donilon was the Assistant Secretary of State and Chief of Staff at the US State Department during the Clinton administration. Donilon is currently serving on the Department of State Review Team for the Obama administration. – Member, Council on Foreign Relations. – Member, Trilateral Commission – Member, Brookings Institute.

– Member of the Aspen StudyGroup. Director of National Intelligence: Dennis Blair

Retired Navy Admiral Dennis Blair held a Rhodes scholarship and studied at Oxford University. His last military posting was Commander in Chief of the US Pacific Command. In the past he was the Director of the Joint Staff and Associate Director of Central Intelligence for Military Support (the Director of Central Intelligence oversees the entire American intelligence community). – Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA): Admiral Blair was a member of the IDA, a military think tank/corporation that works exclusively with the US federal government in addressing the scientific and technical side of security issues. – Project on National Security Reform: He was Deputy Director of the PNSR (see General Jones’ National Security Advisor bio for more on the PNSR). – Council on Foreign Relations: Blair is directly connected to the Council on Foreign Relations, serving as a Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the CFR.  He also co-chaired the CFR Independent Task Force Report titled, U.S.-China Relations: An Affirmative Agenda, a Responsible Course, and chaired the CFR’s Indonesia Commission. – Former member of the Trilateral Commission.

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency: Leon Panetta

Panetta has direct links to the Trilateral Commission, contributing to the organization’s 1993 Annual Report. He’s also a member of the Bretton Woods Committee. Mr. Panetta has a long history within the Washington beltway. In the past he was the Director of the US Office for Civil Rights, a member of Congress from California, and chairman of the House Committee on the Budget. He was also Chief of Staff for President William Clinton. For six years he served on the Board of Directors with the New York Stock Exchange.

White House Chief of Staff: Rahm Emanuel

Mr. Emanuel was a senior advisor to Bill Clinton from 1993 to 1998. It was Emanuel who directed the details of the Oslo Accords ceremony, including the famous handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO leader Yasser Arafat. In 2000 he was placed on the board of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation – “Freddie Mac.” He was also the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. No known direct links to the CFR, Trilateral Commission, or Bilderberg Group.

White House Military Office: Louis Caldera

The White House Military Office acts as the primary military liaison to the White House for military operations. According to the website (a list of presidential/administrative team members) “From 1997 to 1998, Caldera was managing director and chief operating officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service. From 1998 to 2001, he served as the nation’s 17th Secretary of the Army. He has served as a vice chancellor for the California State University system and president of the University of New Mexico, after which he joined the faculty of the UNM School of Law as a tenured professor.” Caldera’s board member positions in the corporate world include seats with A.H. Belo Corporation, IndyMac Bancorp, and Southwest Airlines.  He also served with the Panama Canal Commission, which was charged with overseeing the operations of the Panama Canal. – Member, Council on Foreign Relations. Ambassador to the United Nations: Susan Rice Rice is a former Clinton Assistant Secretary of State, and is closely tied to the global governance movement. – Former member of the Brookings Institute, serving as a Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy and Global Economy programs. – Member, Council on Foreign Relations. – Former member, Trilateral Commission. In the past, Rice has advocated the establishment of a federal department on peacekeeping in order to better connect the US military with the United Nations. She has also supported the idea of an international civilian police force under the command and control of the United Nations. Rice also has connections to a number of other influential organizations. – Board member, National Democratic Institute (see the listing for Department of Health for info on the NDI). – Board member, Atlantic Council of the United States. – Board member, US Fund for UNICEF. This organization supports the work of the United Nations Children’s Fund (which produced the controversial UN Rights of the Child treaty). – Member, Aspen Strategy Group.  Citizens for Global Solutions (used to be named the World Federalist Association), has already announced that it will support Rice in her role at the United Nations.

Domestic Policy Council: Melody Barnes

Melody Barnes is Director of the Domestic Policy Council, the office that coordinates the domestic policy-making processes in the White House. In the past she was the Executive Vice President for Policy at the Center for American Progress – a leftist policy think tank and advocacy group (it promotes an international management solution to climate change). Also, from 1995 to 2003 she was the Chief Counsel to Senator Edward Kennedy who served on the Senate Judiciary Committee. There are no known connections between Barnes and the CFR or Trilateral Commission.

US Trade Representative: Ron Kirk

Kirk was the mayor of Dallas from 1995 until 2002. Before that he worked as Secretary of State for Texas under Governor Ann Richards. Corporate affiliations include board memberships at Brinker International, Dean Foods, and Pet-Smart. Kirk is known as an advocate for creating a NAFTA-super highway that would economically help to tie Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Mr. Kirk has no known immediate connections to the Council on Foreign Relations or Trilateral Commission.

National Economic Council: Lawrence Summers

Under the Obama administration, Summers will head up the National Economic Council, which will coordinate national economic decision making at the highest levels within the federal system. However, Mr. Summers is no stranger to Washington politics. During the 1980s he served on the staff of President Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisors. Then, in 1991 he came on board with the World Bank in the capacity of Chief Economist. Under the Clinton presidency he initially was appointed Undersecretary for International Affairs. Later, after a series of position moves, Summers was appointed as Secretary of the Treasury. After he left the Treasury Department, he was made president of Harvard University, where he served until 2006. That year, he was placed on a Panel of Eminent Persons to work with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Finally, Summers was instrumental in negotiating China’s entrance into the World Trade Organization. Summers is directly linked to the Council on Foreign Relations, having chaired the CFR’s Independent Task Force on Transatlantic Relations, along with Henry Kissinger. He has also been an active member of the Trilateral Commission. And, according to FREE, he has been part of the Bilderberg Group. Mr. Summers has been a board member with a number of other prominent organizations. – The Brookings Institute. – Center of Global Development: A think-tank that looks for ways to make “globalization work for all.” The organization promotes global political solutions to climate change and economic disparity. – Institute for International Economics: This is the only major institute in the United States that focuses exclusively on global financial and economic issues. It’s members, present and past, reads like a who’s who of America’s top financial players (examples: world investor George Soros; President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, William McDonough; former Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O’Neill; and David Rockefeller, former CEO of Chase Manhattan). The IIE promotes global economic management, deeper regional unification for North America, and the empowerment of the International Monetary Fund. – Member, Bretton Woods Committee. Council of Economic Advisors:

Christina Romer Before becoming the chairperson for the Council of Economic Advisors, Romer was a co-director at the National Bureau of Economic Research (under the Program in Monetary Economics). She has also served as Vice President of the American Economic Association. She doesn’t seem to be directly connected to the usual Washington political elite associations.

Economic Recovery Committee: Paul Volker

The Economic Recovery Committee is a new office in the Obama administration. It is charged with providing direction in terms of dealing with the ongoing economic woes in the US and around the world. Paul Volker was the Chairman of the Federal Reserve during the Jimmy Carter presidency. He’s an advocate for a single global currency and an international monetary structure. – Member, Council on Foreign Relations. – Founding member of the Trilateral Commission. – Historic association with the Rockefeller family through his involvement with Chase Bank, and the Trust Committee of Rockefeller Group. A Leadership ReviewPage 20- United Nations Association of the United States (UNAUS): From 2000 to 2004, Volker was the director of the UNAUS; the largest direct UN-linked support body in America. -G30: Current chair of the Group of Thirty (see the listing under Department of Treasury for info on the G30). – Chair to the Independent Inquiry into the United Nations Oil for Food Program.

Office of Management and Budget: Peter Orszag

Mr. Orszag has been appointed by President Obama to act as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. In the past he was the Special Assistant to the President for Economic Policy during the Clinton administration. He was also the director of the Congressional Budget Office in 2007 and 2008. – Brookings Institute: Former Deputy Director of Economic Studies.

Securities and Exchange Commission: Mary Schapiro

Schapiro was appointed and confirmed as head of the Securities and Exchange

Commission under the Obama administration. In the past she sat on the Securities and Exchange Commission under Reagan and Bush, and was appointed under President Clinton to the position of acting chairperson. In 1994

she took the office of Chair for the Commodities Futures Trading Commission. In 1996, Schapiro became president of the National Association of Securities Dealers, and held this post until 2002. From that point until 2007 she held other positions within the National Association of Securities Dealers. In 2007, she became the CEO of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority – the industry’s self-policing body. In other words Schapiro has been, and still is, a central figure in the ongoing economic crisis and collapse of the financial industry.

Council on Environmental Quality: Nancy Sutley

Nancy Sutley will lead the White House Council on Environmental Quality. Before this appointment she was the Deputy Mayor for Energy and Environment, Los Angeles, California. She was also an Energy Advisor for California Governor Gray Davis. And during the Clinton presidency she worked for the Environmental Protection Agency as a Senior Policy Advisor in San Francisco, and as a special EPA assistant in Washington DC. No known memberships in the CFR or Trilateral Commission.

Environmental Protection Agency: Lisa P. Jackson

Lisa Jackson used to work under the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection as Chief of Staff. Before that she was employed with the United States Environmental Protection Agency in Washington DC and New York City. Jackson does not appear to have any connections to global governance advocacy groups.

Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change: Carol Browner

Browner served as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency during the Clinton administration, and has been appointed by President Obama to head up the administration’s climate change agenda. Her past, as an attorney, is one filled with environmental court cases and policy developments – negotiating off shore oil bans, expanding the Big Cypress National Preserve, and working on amendments to the Clean Air Act. Over the years she has worked for Senator Lawton Chiles and Senator Al Gore. She also headed up the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Browner has been criticized by industrial and agricultural groups, along with wise-use advocates, for her excessive focus on environmental enforcement. She’s connected to the Audobon Society (past chair) and Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection. Browner is also linked to APX, Inc., a company that’s involved in carbon-offset credits and environmental commodity marketing.

(Author’s NOTE:) Somehow this seems to be a conflict of interest… Browner heads up the nation’s climate change program while connected to a climate change/carbon market company). Other organizations that Browner is linked to include, – Center for American Progress (See the listing on the Department of Health). – Socialist International: The Socialist International is the world’s largest organization of far-left socialist political parties and governmental leaders. It seeks to openly build a socialist system of global governance, funded through a world taxation program. Furthermore, the SI advocates that the United Nations be radically empowered to act as an international manager. Browner is a member of the SI’s Commission for a Sustainable World Society – the SI’s climate change arm.

Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships: Joshua DuBois

This new White House office will coordinate and direct faith-based programs throughout the administration, with a focus on global interfaith dialogue – primarily with the Muslim community. Joshua DuBois is a young Pentecostal pastor who served as Obama’s director of religious affairs during the Presidential campaign. Besides Mr. DuBois’ religious work, he served as an aide to US Representative Rush Holt and US Representative Charles Rangel. Mr. DuBois has no known relationships with the usual Washington DC foreign affairs organizations.

More information on the Obama team will emerge with time. However, it is my hope that this leadership list will help you better understand the direction of this new administration.

So will there be “change”? Yes, I anticipate that the government will become larger than in previous administrations. It will also become more socialist, more bureaucratic, more internationalist in its foreign affairs, and more overwhelming in its domestic concerns.

Carl Teichrib is a Senior Fellow at World Research Library and is the Chief Editor of Forcing Change, a monthly intelligence-style publication on world affairs and global governance




Don Kraus, CGS Obama Transition Team Meetings, Citizens for Global Solutions blog site, December 6, 2008.


A search through the CFR website ( reveals a number of lectures given by Mr. Biden at the Council on Foreign Relations. In listening to the audio files of Senator Biden at the CFR, and in reading the transcripts, it’s obvious that he’s highly respected by the membership.


Senator Joseph R. Biden, On the Threshold of the New World Order: The Wilsonian Vision and American Foreign Policy in the 1990’s and Beyond, Address to the United States Senate, Washington DC, June 29-July 1, 1992.


Center for a New American Security, Finding Our Way: Debating American Grand Strategy, 2008.



See, James R. Blaker, Defense Alternatives: Policing the New Global Commons, December, 2008, American Security Project.


See the following book: William A. Fleckenstein, Greenspan’s Bubbles: The Age of Ignorance at the Federal Reserve (McGraw-Hill, 2008).


Barbara Conry, Loose Cannon: The National Endowment for Democracy, Cato Foreign Policy Briefing No. 27, November 8, 1993.


See the Member Parties list at the Socialist International website (


Biography of Commissioner Shaun Donovan, New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (

Biography of Commissioner Shaun Donovan


Statement of General James L. Jones before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 28 September 2005.


“US considering international force in West Bank,” Jerusalem Post, online edition, January 8, 2008

A Regulatory Democracy is Hell on Earth


The easiest way to a define regulatory democracy is to look at what America has become. Initially America was formed by its Constitution as a Republic. This means, in part, that people did not have direct vote over who represented them. In the case of the Senate, state senators voted on representatives. Additionally, majority rule did not prevail when it came to electing presidents. Instead an electoral college was created to determine the results of close elections and one had to receive a majority of state delegates to the electoral college to win the presidency.

Over time this Republican system has eroded. Most notably, Senators are now elected by majority rule in public votes and state senates have no say over the choice of Senators. The balance of power in America has shifted as well. Some of this has to do with the raw force of money power. Corporations are recognized as people by the Supreme Court and thus corporate money power has greatly perverted what was left of the Republic. People are easily swayed by promotional messages (often delivered and reinforced by the mainstream media) and the transition to public schools has left government with a virtual monopoly over youth messaging – the theme of which is often globalist.

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion if one looks closely at how the US system of governance has evolved that the evolution of regulatory democracy was simply one of happenstance. The defining moment of the Republic was the Civil War, when states tried to secede and were restrained. After this the various facets of regulatory democracy were erected with efficiency.

If we look at American regulatory democracy today – as it has evolved from a Republican form of government – it is marked initially by overwhelming federal force. Not only that but federal power continually devolves to the executive branch of government and the shadowy elites that stand behind the executive branch. One could argue that a hallmark of regulatory democracy is the constant centralizing of power within the executive branch even as power is removed elsewhere.

The second aspect of regulatory democracy is that regulations themselves are promulgated by a variety of extra-governmental entities over which voters have no direct control. Regulations give people the appearance that there is fairness and a level playing field but in actuality the regulators suffer from regulatory capture – in which the largest regulated entities essentially run the regulators at the expense of smaller players.

In a fully developed regulatory democracy, power has passed entirely from citizens into the hands of a shadowy elite that runs the country via mercantilism, by pulling the regulatory levers of government for its own benefit. The more regulations there are, the more actual control this elite has. Finally, citizens are entirely bound by regulation; their every action controlled by an unelected bureaucracy and their lives tightly ruled by what they can and cannot do. Their estates are stripped by taxes; their children come under the mind control of public schools; their sons and daughters, having matriculated, join the military for lack of better employment and are sent overseas to pursue foreign wars; their professional venues are controlled by the options offered to them by regulatory democracy – and these venues often reinforce the worst and most petty aspects of the degenerating society itself.

Every regulation, of course, is a price fix, and price fixes distort the economy and lower the quality of life for all. The more regulations there are the worse the quality of life becomes, the more unemployment rises and lawlessness and corruption rule the day. Regulation makes criminals out of honest individuals and encourages the schisming and fractioning of society into bitter, competitive groups. Regulation holds out the promise of better living by making society fairer and more lawful, but in actual fact, advanced regulatory democracies are among the most lawless, brutal and predatory societies. Republics are a viable form of government; regulatory democracies create a true Hell-on-earth.



Federal Reserve ‘Embeds’ Employees in Banks

Wednesday, June 22, 2011 – by Staff Report


The Regulator Down the Hall … Fed and Comptroller of Currency Bolster the Ranks of Staffers ‘Embedded’ at Nation’s Biggest Banks … Memo to employees at big Wall Street banks and securities firms: Be careful what you say on the elevator. You might be surrounded by regulators. As part of a push to prevent another financial crisis, theFederal Reserve Bank of New York and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency are increasing the number of examiners who go to work every day at the companies they regulate. Much like reporters assigned to a military unit during war, these regulatory “embeds” get unprecedented access to financial firms such as Bank of America Corp., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley. – Wall Street Journal

Dominant Social Theme: Regulators always get it right.

Free-Market Analysis: Is there any justification for this? The dominant social theme “embedded” in the above article is clear: More efficient regulatory endeavors will reduce the kind of financial crises that have been prevalent throughout the history of modern capitalism. Only more and better government regulation is the answer.

Of course, the regulatory answer to big businesses excesses has not worked in the past and there is no reason why it will work in the future. Every regulation is actually a price fix that further distorts the marketplace and transfers wealth from producers to those who do not know how to produce. Nonetheless, this dominant social theme rolls on. Every time there is a financial setback, the US government and its adjunct enforcer the central bank (Federal Reserve) gains more power. This goes for the rest of the Western world, too.

Now regulations are not enough. Regulation is to be abetted by physical presence. But will it really help if Federal Reserve employees work in the same building as the banks they are supposed to regulate? According to the Wall Street Journal, these embedded regulators will be much more focused than previous regulators. They will eat lunch at the company cafeteria and have unprecedented exposure to company paperwork. Here’s some more from the article:

It’s not a small program either and includes up to about 150 regulators “scattered across banks and securities firms overseen by the New York Fed.” That total will double by this fall, according to a person familiar with the situation. As a result, groups of 15 to 20 regulators per company will swell to as many as 35 people. Other banks with on-site New York Fed supervision include Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Barclays PLC, Citigroup Inc., Credit Suisse Group AG, Deutsche Bank AG, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and UBS AG. …

The on-site reviews are thorough and can produce friction between the bank examiners and their subjects, according to bankers and regulators. The Fed’s latest how-to “Commercial Bank Examination Manual” is 1,808 pages long, and examiners have the power to “review all books and records maintained by a financial institution.” In addition to policing the rules, Fed examiners should “identify vulnerabilities early enough to head off major problems,” says Daniel Tarullo, a Federal Reserve governor …

Regulators are also pushing examiners to challenge chief executives and boards of directors. “It should be a drop-by relationship,” says Sarah Dahlgren, who took over the New York Fed’s financial-institution supervision group in January after leading a team that monitored the New York Fed’s loan to insurer American International Group Inc. The No. 1 embed at each firm is expected to meet with the CEO at least once a month. Michael Brosnan, an OCC official overseeing supervision of large U.S. banks, says the agency is “increasingly involved in governance and oversight” of the 15 largest banks.

Again, the point to keep in mind when contemplating what is taking place is that every regulation is a price fix and every price fix distorts the economy and produces an impoverishing wealth transfer. Half of America is on one form of government dole or another now; fifty million are on food stamps. When is it enough?

Regulation cannot work, logically speaking. It DOES not work. Not with large financial entities either. But each time a financial crisis occurs, Congress and the Federal Reserve respond with more regulation. Speeches are made; legislation is drawn up. It is beyond cynical. These are not stupid individuals. They know they are participating in a charade. Certainly they should; there is no excuse not to in the Internet Era.

The problem begins with money itself. The system has been cleverly designed to maximize money troubles while giving the appearance of concerned supervision. The Federal Reserve basically creates money from nothing and in doing so creates inflation. The great inflation fighter in this manner is in fact an inflation producer; its mechanisms are entirely tuned in this manner.

It is not accidental. In a free-market, modern money usually devolves to gold and silver. When there is too much gold and silver circulating, the price drops and, once this occurs, mines shut down and hoarders hold onto their money. Prices eventually go back up and mines reopen and hoarders dishoard.

Because Fed bankers do not know (cannot know; don’t wish to know) how much money is too much, they inevitably overprint over time. This gives rises to economic booms as people react to the overabundance of money by over-expanding their businesses. Eventually a bust takes place as the boom inevitably subsides. People lose their houses, jobs and businesses. The power elite that has created and runs central banking worldwide then uses the opportunity of the bust to further consolidate power and wealth.

Each economic down-cycle reveals more “corruption” and more systemic difficulties that have to be attacked by better and more comprehensive regulation. This regulation will prove imperfect when the next downturn occurs. Regulatory authorities will claim that the constant evolution of regulation is inevitable because it is important to keep up with the market itself.

But this is not what is happening. The market is not merely evolving; those who are involved in markets are consciously reacting to regulations and seeking out business methodologies that are unregulated. This is not a singular process; in the US and throughout the West it takes place across all industries, private and public.

The West does not have free markets; it has manipulated ones. Via legislation, regulatory democracy inevitably empowers the powerful and enriches the wealthy. The idea that the “people” can “take back” government is illusory, whether by state banking or in any other way.

The only way to guarantee better and more just society is to insist on freedom … free-markets, free-thinking, free-living. If one must have government, it should be as small as possible (as local as possible) and with as little transfer of wealth as possible so that bullies are not empowered and “leaders” are not overly privileged.

Of course, there is always push-back; many justifications are inevitably advanced for regulation including the idea of “market failure.” This is the fundamental defense of modern levelers. But those who defend this concept cannot, when pressed, name a single “failure” caused by the market. Inevitably, when one begins to examine this argument, one finds that it was a previous rule or law that set in motion the distortion that the “market” supposedly caused.

Regulation also forces bigness. The US – and the West – long ago passed into a kind of market-fascism where large corporations (themselves a product of regulation) are essentially paired with their regulatory overseers.

It doesn’t matter whether the regulations seem to make sense or not. The system is evidently and obviously driven by Anglo-American power elite interests and the end result is intended to be one where markets and corporations are big enough to function within the context of a “one world order.”

Concentrating power and authority in a small group of firms also allows the elites to shuffle their facilitators between the public and private sector. May “regulators” at the top level are the same people who work in the entities themselves. The Journal article lists some of these groups: Capital One Financial Corp., U.S. Bancorp, Wells Fargo & Co. and units of Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC and HSBC Holdings PLC.

Not long ago, Morgan Stanley Chairman John Mack said he “loved” having regulators nearby. But for Mack and others, regulatory authority is merely part of the larger system, one he is helping to build. Such over-regulation also is a major disincentive to competition as only the largest players can afford the massive costs of modern regulatory democracy.

Eventually, regulatory democracy implodes, a victim of its own ludicrousness. As the regulations become ever more burdensome and obviously flawed, public opinion turns against the process. This has other ramifications. With their strategies unmasked, the elites of the day either shove the system toward totalitarianism or take a step back from the precipice. In the modern era, the Internet has speeded up this process.

There are plenty of signs, including this current decision to “embed” regulators, that regulatory democracies are now approaching the far end of regulatory utility. The farcical nature of the system must become evident at some point because it never stops. It begins with public approval and ends by attacking the very methodologies that make survival possible.

Conclusion: As this era of regulatory democracy draws to its deserved end, as it must, Western society begins to confront the nakedness of power itself, stripped of its regulatory disguise. This will surely provide a turning point of one sort or another.



The Power Elite

The term “power elite” traces to the writings of C. Wright Mills, including his 1956 book, The Power Elite. The concept posits wealthy and/or well connected families and individuals who seek to expand their wealth by applying and promoting dominant social themes. Such themes may eventually develop into widely held archetypes or memes.

Often such themes seem to originate with the United NationsWorld Bank, World Trade Organization, World Health Organization or other international bodies that are receptive to influence by the power elite. The themes then are picked up and rebroadcast by themainstream media. Thus, what may seem to be the work of an independent institutional staff may actually be the brainchild of the power elite.

Concepts such as bird flu, Islamofascism and peak oil are so extensively promoted that much of the public unquestioningly accepts their fearful premises and demand action. Those with the wherewithal to provide solutions – products, services and corporate offerings via public markets – may earn vast profits as a consequence.

There is little contemporary scholarly analysis of the concept of the power elite, but it corresponds roughly to what once was called “the money power.”

There are a variety of theories as to the composition and character of the power elite. It sometimes is referred to ominously as the “Illuminati,” the “black church” or the “black nobility.” It is not necessary to confirm such characterizations to recognize that the action and influence of modern money power are pervasive.

In most conceptions, the core of the power elite coalesces around the European and American banking dynasties and some elite, titled families, or it may be characterized as a “sub-church” within the Roman Catholic, Jewish or other religion. Chief among these dynasties are likely the Rockefellers and Rothschilds.

In some conceptions, the power elite includes members who claim to trace their ancestry to ancient times, even to Babylon and beyond. This accords with the notion that members believe their pedigrees differentiate them from the “common herd.”

Signifiers of power elite activity include a disdain of free-markets and the persistent and uncritical promotion of a theme or meme to the exclusion of contrary evidence or argument.



Dominant Social Theme(s)

A Dominant Social Theme is a belief system (usually concerning a purported social or natural problem) launched by the monetary elite that grows into an archetype or meme, usually after much repetition. The problem may be centered on people themselves (overpopulation) or caused by people (global warming). The term was invented by Anthony Wile and first utilized in his book The Liberation of Flockhead. The term actually took on a more defined meaning in Wile’s subsequent release of his followup book, High Alert.

Dominant Social Themes often are launched from the centers of the power elite‘s global architecture, including the United Nations,World Bank, World Trade Organization and World Health Organization, where the related problems are declared to be such. The themes are then rebroadcast by the mainstream media.

The hallmarks of a problem that drives a dominant social theme are:

• The problem is presented as one that can be solved only by those in authority.

• The prescribed solution requires action by, and greater authority for, social and political institutions that are distant from the societies they pretend to benefit.

• Reminders of the problem persist no matter how much evidence appears that the problem is fictitious, trivial or irremediable.

• The problem may co-exist in the public’s mind with other purported problems with which it is inconsistent.

The United Nations is an example of an authority-based solution to a problem proposed by a Dominant Social Theme. The problem is international conflict, including war. The solution is for national governments to be made subject to a worldwide authority.

The European Union is the United Nations writ small. The problem is isolated national markets and a lack of economic cooperation. The solution is for the national governments of Europe to be made subject to a European authority.

Other examples of problems that support Dominant Social Themes are:

Bird flu: Even though it is rarely communicable from human to human, the disease is promoted as an extraordinary problem by emphasizing the high rate of mortality among the few people infected. This encourages the militarization of health care, supports planning for a “state of emergency” in Western countries and makes quarantining entire populations acceptable to the public. It also enriches Big Pharma and its shareholders by creating demand for vaccines and other drugs.

Swine flu: This disease is the thematic complement of bird flu. Even though the mortality rate is unremarkable by the standard of seasonal flu, the disease is promoted as an extraordinary problem by emphasizing the ease with which it is communicated from human to human. This encourages the militarization of health care, supports planning for a “state of emergency” in Western countries and makes quarantining entire populations acceptable to the public. It also enriches Big Pharma and its shareholders by creating demand for vaccines and other drugs.

Peak oil: Belief that oil supplies are on the verge of exhaustion justifies rising oil prices, for the benefit of producers, and provides a rationale for energy-efficiency regulations (to the benefit of certain manufacturers) and for subsidies for companies involved with “alternative energy” (biodiesel, solar, wind power and others). It also supports the promotion of public companies associated with energy alternatives.

Central banking: The idea that depressions are caused by free markets and by constraints on the supply of money imposed by a redeemable currency support the necessity of giving unlimited discretionary power to central banks that preside over fiat currencies. The manipulation of the fiat currencies can generate enormous wealth for favored parties.

The creation and exploitation of Dominant Social Themes has been aided by the growth of modern, centralized mass media. The Internet, which decentralizes the power for mass communication, threatens the ability to invent and control Dominant Social Themes.


You have just completed one of the shortest and best education for free anywhere in the world. You can show your appreciation by going here and reading one more article.


The New FBI Powers: Cointelpro on Steroids


By John W. Whitehead

“The trouble with government as it is, is that it doesn’t represent the people. It controls them.”–John Lennon (1966)

“When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.”– Thomas Jefferson

Listen closely and what you will hear, beneath the babble of political chatter and other mindless political noises distracting you from what’s really going on, are the dying squeals of the Fourth Amendment. It dies a little more with every no-knock raid that is carried out by a SWAT team, every phone call eavesdropped on by FBI agents, and every piece of legislation passed that further undermines the right of every American to be free from governmental intrusions into their private affairs.

Meanwhile, President Obama and John Boehner are exchanging political niceties on the golf course, Congress is doing their utmost to be as ineffective as possible, and the Tea Party–once thought to be an alternative to politics as usual–is clowning around with candidates who, upon election, have proven to be no better than their predecessors and just as untrustworthy when it comes to protecting our rights and our interests. Yet no matter how hard Americans work to insulate themselves from the harsh realities of life today–endless wars, crippling debt, sustained unemployment, a growing homeless population, rising food and gas prices, morally bankrupt and corrupt politicians, plummeting literacy rates, and on and on–there can be no ignoring the steady drumbeat of the police state marching in lockstep with our government.

Incredibly, with little outcry from the populace, the lengths to which the government will go in its quest for total control have become more extreme with every passing day. Now comes the news that the FBI intends to grant to its 14,000 agents expansive additionalpowers that include relaxing restrictions on a low-level category of investigations termed “assessments.” This allows FBI agents to investigate individuals using highly intrusive monitoring techniques, including infiltrating suspect organizations with confidential informants and photographing and tailing suspect individuals, without having any factual basis for suspecting them of wrongdoing. (Incredibly, during the four-month period running from December 2008 to March 2009, the FBI initiated close to 12,000 assessments of individuals and organizations, and that was before the rules were further relaxed.)

This latest relaxing of the rules, justified as a way to cut down on cumbersome record-keeping, will allow the FBI significant new powers to search law enforcement and private databases, go through household trash, and deploy surveillance teams, with evenfewer checks against abuse. The point, of course, is that if agents aren’t required to maintain a paper trail documenting their activities, there can be no way to hold the government accountable for subsequent abuses.

These new powers, detailed in a forthcoming edition of the FBI’s operations manual, extend the agency’s reach into the lives of average Americans and effectively transform the citizenry into a nation of suspects, reversing the burden of proof so that we are now all guilty until proven innocent. Thus, no longer do agents need evidence of possible criminal or terrorist activity in order to launch an investigation. Now, they can “proactively” look into people and groups, searching databases without making a record about it, conducting lie detector tests and searching people’s trash.

Moreover, as FBI general counsel Valerie Caproni revealed, agents want to be able to use the information found in a subject’s trash to pressure that person to assist in a government investigation. Under the new guidelines, surveillance squads can also be deployed repeatedly to follow “targets,” agents can infiltrate organizations for longer periods of time before certain undisclosed “rules” kick in, and public officials, members of the news media or academic scholars can be investigated without the need for extra supervision.

All of this has been sanctioned by the Obama administration, which, as the New York Times aptly notes, “has long been bumbling along in the footsteps of its predecessor when it comes to sacrificing Americans’ basic rights and liberties under the false flag of fighting terrorism” and now “seems ready to lurch even farther down that dismal road than George W. Bush did.” In fact, this steady erosion of our rights started long before Bush came into office. Indeed, it has little to do with political affiliation and everything to do with an entrenched bureaucratic mindset–call it the “Establishment,” if you like–that, in its quest to amass and retain power, seeks to function autonomously and independent of the Constitution.

What we are witnessing is a coup d’etat that is aimed at overthrowing our representative government and replacing it with one that outwardly may appear to embrace democratic ideals but inwardly is nothing more than an authoritarian regime. And the Establishment is counting on the fact that Americans will gullibly continue to trust the government and turn a blind eye to its power grabs and abuses.

The relationship between the American people and their government was once defined by a social contract (the U.S. Constitution) that was predicated on a mutual respect for the rule of law and a clear understanding that government exists to serve the people and not the other way around. That is no longer the case. Having ceded to the government all manner of control over our lives, renouncing our claims to such things as privacy in exchange for the phantom promise of security, we now find ourselves in the unenviable position of being trapped in a prison of our own making.

It is a phenomenon that Abraham Kaplan referred to as the law of the instrument: “Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding.” Or to put it another way: to a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Unfortunately, in the scenario that has been playing out in recent years, we have become the nails to the government’s hammer. After all, having equipped government agents with an arsenal of tools, weapons and powers with which to vanquish the so-called forces of terror, it was inevitable that that same arsenal would eventually be turned on us. As Michael German, a former FBI agent, recently observed, “You have a bunch of guys and women all over the country sent out to find terrorism. Fortunately, there isn’t a lot of terrorism in many communities. So they end up pursuing people who are critical of the government.”

One such person is Scott Crow, a relatively obscure political activist who has been the object of intense surveillance by FBI counterterrorism agents. Other targets of bureau surveillance, according to the New York Times, have included antiwar activists in Pittsburgh, animal rights advocates in Virginia and liberal Roman Catholics in Nebraska. “When such investigations produce no criminal charges,” notes the Times, “their methods rarely come to light publicly.”

In the case of Scott Crow, those methods were revealed as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request to see the FBI file on him. At a massive 440 pages, Crow’s file speaks volumes about the way in which the government views the American people as a whole–as potential threats to national security, not to mention what it says about the leeway given to the FBI to completely disregard the Fourth Amendment’s protections against searches and seizures of our property and persons. Over the course of at least three years, Crow had agents staking out his house, tracking the comings and goings of visitors, monitoring his phone calls, mail and email, sifting through his trash, infiltrating his circle of friends, and even monitoring him round the clock with a video camera attached to a phone pole across the street from his house.

Given that no criminal charges whatsoever were ever levied against Crow, it might appear that the agency went overboard in its efforts to monitor his activities, but as the FBI’s new manual reveals, such surveillance–even in the absence of credible evidence suggesting wrongdoing–is par for the course. For the federal government to go to such expense (taxpayer expense, that is) and trouble over a political activist, in particular, might seem rather paranoid. However, that is exactly what we are dealing with–a government that is increasingly paranoid about having its authority challenged and determined to discourage such challenges by inciting fear in people.

Then again, this is nothing new. Between 1956 and 1971, the FBI conducted an intensive domestic intelligence program, termed Cointelpro, intended to neutralize domestic political dissidents. According to the Church Committee, the Senate task force charged with investigating Cointelpro abuses, “Too many people have been spied upon by too many Government agencies and too much information has been collected. The Government has often undertaken the secret surveillance of citizens on the basis of their political beliefs, even when those beliefs posed no threat of violence or illegal acts on behalf of a hostile foreign power. The Government, operating primarily through secret informants, but also using other intrusive techniques such as wiretaps, microphone ‘bugs,’ surreptitious mail opening, and break-ins, has swept in vast amounts of information about the personal lives, views, and associations of American citizens.” The report continued:

Groups and individuals have been harassed and disrupted because of their political views and their lifestyles. Investigations have been based upon vague standards whose breadth made excessive collection inevitable. Unsavory and vicious tactics have been employed–including anonymous attempts to break up marriages, disrupt meetings, ostracize persons from their professions, and provoke target groups into rivalries that might result in deaths. Intelligence agencies have served the political and personal objectives of presidents and other high officials.

Commenting on the methods employed by the FBI in the implementation of Cointelpro, the Church Committee noted, “The unexpressed major premise of the programs was that a law enforcement agency has the duty to do whatever is necessary to combat perceived threats to the existing social and political order.” The Committee added, “While the declared purposes of these programs were to protect the ‘national security’ or prevent violence, Bureau witnesses admit that many of the targets were nonviolent and most had no connections with a foreign power. Indeed, nonviolent organizations and individuals were targeted because the Bureau believed they represented a ‘potential’ for violence–and nonviolent citizens who were against the war in Vietnam were targeted because they gave ‘aid and comfort’ to violent demonstrators by lending respectability to their cause.”

Following the Church Committee’s report, then-Attorney General Edward Levi implemented a set of guidelines designed to preclude FBI abuse regarding domestic investigations. These guidelines were tweaked by subsequent Attorneys General, substantially relaxed by Attorney General John Ashcroft following the September 11 attacks, further weakened by AG Michael Mukasey in 2008, and now under Eric Holder, any such restrictions are just about nonexistent.

Thus, it would seem we’re back to where we started, only this time we’re facing Cointelpro on steroids–pumped up on the government’s self-righteous quest to ferret out peace activists and dissidents and energized by an arsenal of invasive technologies that make the phone tapping equipment of the 1960s look like Tinker Toys. In fact, this modern period of FBI lawlessness resembles Cointelpro operations in a variety of ways. In both instances, the FBI singled out outspoken critics of the Establishment for scrutiny, attempted to assign them terrorist ties (none were found), and continued the investigations long past the point at which they were found not guilty of having committed any crimes. For example, an attorney for those targeted in a September 2011 FBI raid–including an activist-minded couple that sells silkscreened baby outfits and other clothes with phrases like “Help Wanted: Revolutionaries”–describes his clients as “public non-violent activists with long, distinguished careers in public service, including teachers, union organizers and antiwar and community leaders.”

With all of the so-called threats coming from outside the country, why is the government expending so much energy on a relatively small group of peace and anti-war activists whose First Amendment activities comprise the totality of their “suspicious” behavior? It’s the hammer and nail analogy again. Having acquired all of these new tools and powers post-9/11, of course the government wants to hold onto them and what better way to do so than by using them to ferret out “potential” threats. A prime example occurred in 2002, when the FBI dispatched a special agent, armed with a camera, to a peace rally to search for terrorism suspects who might happen to be there, just to “see what they are doing.” The protest was sponsored by the Thomas Merton Center, an organization dedicated to advocating peaceful solutions to international conflicts, and composed primarily of individuals distributing leaflets. The Office of Inspector General, in its report on FBI surveillance of domestic organizations, characterized the task provided to the special agent assigned to the Merton protest as a “make-work” project.

Mark my words: we’re going to find, as time goes on and we come under greater and greater surveillance, that we have all become part of the government’s “make-work” project. What this means is that in order to justify their existence and earn their pay, they’ll be investigating perfectly harmless, innocent citizens.

So what’s to be done?

First, the American people need to get their heads out of the sand and their butts off the couches and act like real Americans for a change. And by that I mean taking to the streets and truly protesting this deplorable state of our nation. March on Washington, march on your town hall–but whatever you do, make your voices heard. If they can do it in Europe and China and the Middle East, there’s absolutely no reason we can’t do it here.

Second, once we’ve gotten Congress’ attention, we need to push for a legislative response to these FBI abuses. It can be done, but it will take Americans coming together across party lines and calling for Congress to pass legislation restoring the Fourth Amendment and restricting what government agents can do, especially without a court order. Congress may be largely corrupt and incompetent, but with the right kind of citizen pressure, changes can be had. Whatever you do, however, beware of promises made on the campaign trail. As we have seen repeatedly, they never stick.

Third, act now before it’s too late. That dying squeal, the sound of the Fourth Amendment having been gutted and bleeding to death, is getting fainter and fainter. Once it goes silent, there’ll be no turning back.

How the Internet Makes False Flags More Difficult


Forward by OldDog

There is no doubt in my mind that the discovery of flavor enhancements by the food manufacturing industry, and their collusion with the pharmaceutical/ health care industry is directly responsible for the success of planned obesity in America. Likewise, there remains no doubt that the concept was dependent on firstly manipulating the minds of Americans in the public education/media industry and lowering their cognitive ability. The most rapacious attribute of many Americans’ today is the astounding level of their intellectual apathy. One can only wonder what happened to their innate curiosity, and awareness of reality. America desperately needs to expand the field of psychometrics. An inherent ability to recognize one’s intellectual deficiency and the auto determination to address the problem is absolutely imperative if America is to survive as a world leader, and that attribute is sorely missing in this generation. With that one attribute, one can become an autodidact with ease while the internet is still available. While public conversation has become an obsolete social interaction, along with reading anything that does not titillate the mind in the first sentence, we as a society slide deeper and deeper into the abyss of ignorance. This is the result of a republican form of government morphing into a regulated democracy under the complete control of an elite group of international bankers, whose objective is total global dominion. As you read the Travistock Institution lead-in to the main article below, you will discover considerable authentication for this opinion.

 The Tavistock Institution

By Anthony Wile

The Tavistock Institute sits at the center of a web of evil, if one is inclined toward free-market thinking principles. It’s safe to say that most of the American population hasn’t a clue what the Tavistock Institute stands for. It’s not a new organization. This London based not-for-profit organization was founded in 1947. The Institute operates a $6 billion a year network of foundations and it’s all funded by US taxpayers.

There are ten major institutions under its direct control, but there are 400 subsidiaries, and 3,000 think tanks and study groups, which develop, implement, and impose some of its research. The Stanford Research Institute is a $150 million a year operation with 3,300 employees and it’s a subsidiary of the Tavistock Institute.

The Stanford Research Institute orchestrates program surveillance for Kaiser and Bechtel, as well as 400 other companies, plus it implements extensive intelligence operations for the CIA. The Institute is located on the West Coast of the United States. The main focus of the institute is behavioral sciences and mind control.

Tavistock Institute was originally established to study the effects of the condition called ‘shellshock,’ which affected many of the British soldiers that survived the First World War. The initial research established a breaking point for men under stress and they made important progress in terms of treatment.

When Sigmund Freud move to England and settled in Maresfield Gardens he became one of the main psychiatrists and somewhat of an academic rock star thanks to his work on behavioral science theories and mind control tactics.

Today, the Tavistock network extends from the University of Sussex to MIT, Esalen, the Hudson Institute, the Heritage Foundation, US Air Force Intelligence, the Center of Strategic and International Studies at Georgetown, and the Mitre and Rand corporations. There’s a network of secret groups that indoctrinate personnel from these organizations so there’s an element of modern day cloak and dagger tactics surrounding the institute.

The Club of Rome, the Trilateral Commission, the Ditchley Foundation, and the Mont Pelerin Society are the instruction conduits for the Tavistock Institute, and since all of them are secret there’s little to be said about them unless you undergo instruction at the request of an employer who is associated with the institute.

Tavistock defines itself as a not-for-profit organisation that undertakes research, consultancy, and professional development. The Institute also publishes a scholarly journal called, Human Relations and host Evaluation – The International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, which helps organizations develop through innovation and change, especially when emotional and technical challenges are involved.

The real purpose of the Tavistock Institute is to impose various dominant social themes on the West and its middle class populations. While there is no certain evidence of it, Tavistock supposedly helped start the West’s rock and roll revolution, including the Beatles and Rolling Stones.

The idea was to break down the traditional family unit, while celebrating an anti-intellectual youth culture. Tavistock, like so many other research groups and think tanks is at the service of the Anglosphere elites that want to create world government and believe that familial and communal elements of society must be broken down in order to do so.

How the Internet makes False Flags more Difficult


By Anthony Wile

The “Internet Reformation” (as we call it) is a natural outgrowth of our perception that the ‘Net itself is a kind of modern-day Gutenberg Press. It’s a concept we’ve been writing about for nearly a decade. Initially, it seemed like an interesting theory, but everything keeps falling into place and the historical parallels are startling. What they seem to reveal is an upcoming electronically-based Renaissance of sorts.

This is of course not necessarily a popular view. The alternative Internet media is often relentlessly gloomy. One is bombarded daily with information about the 5,000-year-old evil of the Illuminati, the impossibility of stopping the New World Order, the invulnerability of the world’s great banking families such as the Rothschilds and Rockefellers who are said to control tens or even hundreds of trillions.

And yet, look around. Despite the challenges, there is plenty of evidence of pushback. And why shouldn’t this trend continue, no matter what counterattacks are made?

Look at history. The Catholic Church launched its Counter-Reformation but wasn’t successful in stopping either Lutheranism or Protestantism. The elites of the day tried to license printing presses but were not successful. They tried to confiscate books as well. Finally, they tried war, but eventually had to declare a peace via the Treaty of Westphalia that established the modern nation state.

What was seemingly at work then, as now, is Marshall McLuhan’s “hive mind.” People may scoff at the concept of a hive mind, but humans are seemingly structured to seize on the most modern concepts as part of the struggle to survive and get ahead. The stale nostrums of the modern Dark Age – the 20th century – are giving way to a dawn of knowledge hitherto repressed by the power elite.

The discovery of the 10,000 year-old-city of Dwarka off the coast of India, the probable reality of a universe organized by electricity rather than gravity, the existence of abiotic oil generated by geological processes, the reality of vitamin therapy and naturopathy have all found popularity on the Internet – along with the free-market economics of Austrians such as Ludwig von Mises. Twenty years ago, such concepts and discoveries would not have been mentioned, generally, let alone circulated.

The Internet has begun to blow up power elite memes – the fear-based promotions by which the Anglo-Americanelites have sought to control society. Literally trillions of dollars have been thrown into an effort to create a network of political structures (UNIMFBIS, etc.), think tanks, educational facilities and popular media that can amplify thesedominant social themes. Once they have become part of the public consciousness, authoritarian and globalist solutions are inevitably proposed. It looks like a natural process but in fact, it is an entirely artificial one.

The same process takes place as regards investing. Fear-based themes such as global warming are promoted with increasing fervor over years and decades. International political solutions are introduced along with corporate solutions. Companies large and small proclaim “green” solutions even though global warming has been massively discredited.

And the scale at which the Anglo-American power elite works is almost unfathomable, and the current conspiracy to create One World Government probably goes back at least 300 years. From bases in the City of London, theVatican and Washington DC, seep deliberate promotions – often seemingly honed within the Tavistock Institute. A handful of great banking families along with their religious, corporate and military facilitators, go to work to waft them around the world.

Once the dominant social themes and sub themes are distributed via the controlled mainstream media, the UN and other internationalist institutions produce solutions that inevitably involve more control for the globalists at the expense of the world’s unknowing citizenry.

There are vast sums of money to be made as well within this great game of mind control. Private companies are provided with “solutions” to the elite promotions of the day. These entities, controlled by the elites, funded by their hedge funds and private money, are gradually released onto the world’s great exchanges.

Once the companies are public, cash is funneled back to its inevitable elite destination where the “wisemen” have vast seed positions at virtually no cost. The great families and their facilitators siphon off proceeds from their manipulations and invest the funds in more tangible assets such as real estate, oil and precious metals. The real estate is developed; the oil is marketed; the gold and silver finds its way back to Switzerland where it is stored in deep vaults and subject to off-the-books accounting by Switzerland’s many private banks.

It is probably that simple. First they seed the fear, then they deliver the dreams, then they blow off their 8.5 x 11 pieces of paper into smaller pieces of paper (fiat money), then they quickly convert that devaluing paper into tangible assets. Central banks are the control hub that gives the elite this power through money creation. Mainstream media is complicit in aiding and abetting the entire societal wealth-draining process, which is cloaked under a statist religion we call “regulatory democracy.”

This is the process that seems to have emerged painstakingly over the past century. The artificial business cycle itself helps consolidate this centralization. It is a work of virtual genius that has been elaborated on patiently over decades and centuries. Fortunately for the rest of the world, the Internet and its billions of bloggers and viewers has exposed every part of its operations. This is becoming a problem for the elites as the dollar reserve currency gradually collapses along with faith in individual securities investing to generate retirement income.

All these manipulations are increasingly exposed. How do I know? You’re reading this article aren’t you? And even those who do not read this article may read similar analyses elsewhere. The same thing happened once the Gutenberg Press was discovered. People read the bible for themselves in vulgate and began to realize that the current corrupt version of the Roman Catholic Church did not correspond to the Holy Word. The word spread; revolutions and regime changes began.

It’s happening today for the same reasons. There were financial crises in Europe when the Gutenberg Press was expanding its influence. The financial crises combined with the explosion of information offered by books to create the Renaissance.

The elites of the day tried to manipulate the explosion of knowledge via the Reformation (to split the Catholic church) and by fomenting the French Revolution. But for several hundred years, nothing worked as it should. Secret history seems to show us that no matter what the elites of the day did, freedom and knowledge expanded.

We are still at the beginning of such a point of departure. The elites, having created a second, electronic printing press by mistake may now have to take a step back as they did before, 500 years ago. One can see knowledge spreading.

Google’s search engine provides us with literally tens of millions of cites for Mises, Hayek and free-market economics. There is a great hunger for information about free-markets and free-market thinking and the Internet has made it possible to satisfy that need.

It seems to have taken about 100 years for the Gutenberg Press to spark the Renaissance. The Reformation, the Enlightenment, the Glorious Revolution, the American Revolution, the French Revolution and numerous other social changes. The impact of the Gutenberg Press likely was responsible for a number of ill-defined “Peasant” wars as well, that raged across Europe for 30 years.

The wars were so numerous finally and so wide-ranging that the European leadership of the day had to convene a peace conference in Westphalia that lasted a full decade. Out of it emerged the concept of an inviolate nation state. No country had the right to attack another.

This Peace of Westphalia was deliberately overturned by the UN Security Council in 2005. Something called the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) was substituted in its place. R2P virtually demands that if a leadership is “threatening” it citizens, the big Western powers have an affirmative obligation to intervene. R2P has now embroiled the West in numerous major, military confrontations.

One of the ways that the elites responded to the advent of the Gutenberg Press was through war – and more war. Various low-key wars spread across the length and breadth of Europe. It didn’t do much good, though. The Renaissance still happened. The Reformation spun out of control. British royalty was overthrown. The New World was discovered and populated. Freedom was rediscovered and the scientific method was introduced.

One can make a case (and we have) that this paradigm, exactly, is repeating itself. It may be true that an Internet false flag event is being planned by Western elites. War on a false enemy may be declared as a result – and laws passed to restrict the Internet and block the alternative media – all in an attempt to stop truth-telling. But while many who are predicting the demise of the Internet (as a facility for the free dispersal of knowledge), I don’t.

There are signs of what is to come. The hacker group Lulzsec recently took down the CIA web site after attacking US Congress web facilities as well. Some have claimed Lulzsec is itself a front for US Intel agencies. Suspicions have been raised as well about the hacker group Anonymous. We reported the other day about CIA Director Leon Panetta, who said in a recent hearing that the US may soon face a cyber attack that would be the equivalent of Pearl Harbor. Alternative Internet websites increasingly have been filled with articles about potential false-flag events.

Over at Washington’s Blog, for example, we find an article on false flags entitled, Are Hacker Attacks False Flag Attacks to Justify a Crackdown on the Internet? Washington relates how former Counter Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke told a leading expert on internet free speech, Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig, that there was going to be an “i-9/11″, in other words, an electronic terrorist act, and an “i-Patriot Act” to crack down on freedoms on the Internet under the guise of protecting against such threats.

Washington, like many from the blogosphere, believes that like The Patriot Act, an i-Patriot Act is “sitting in the drawers of the Justice Department for the last 20 years waiting for the event where they would pull it out.” This may well be the case. But there are still stubbornly lingering questions over 9/11, with many, according to surveys, apparently harboring suspicions that 9/11 itself constituted some sort of false flag operation intended to start wars and introduce even more authoritarianism into the US.

If one goes online and queries Google with “Internet false flag” nearly FOUR MILLION cites turn up. There is a good deal of consciousness within the alternative press at this point about such potential false flags. A false flag by definition is a secret manipulation. How can an Internet false flag be introduced logically when everybody knows about it and is expecting it?

There are many ways it can happen of course. But in fact, with secrecy all but undermined as regards these black ops, the Anglosphere elite that surely wishes to undermine the Internet Reformation is going to run into considerable pushback if it tries one of these operations. This is not to say it won’t happen, only that it may not be nearly as effective as some are now predicting.

This article has tried to show that what is occurring today with respect to a major societal shift in understanding also happened 500 years ago with the advent of the Gutenberg Press. The parallels exist for anyone who wishes to scrutinize them and the affinity of the trend lines are being drawn realtime.

The elites of the day seemingly could not control the ramifications of the Gutenberg Press no matter what they tried to do, and they evidently tried everything from war, to licensing, to false flag events and social manipulation. It didn’t matter; force never solves anything long term. Indeed, “the pen is mightier than the sword.” Now, nearly 600 years after Gutenberg’s original invention of mass conversation, a “great shift” – Internet Reformation – has begun anew.

Of course, analyzing history in hindsight is a difficult occupation. Certainly people can come to a different conclusion, or even entirely reject this analysis as too facile. But for me the parallels are clear. The Internet Reformation itself may prove a great deal more resilient than some now believe. The human hive mind is busy buzzing. The spread of knowledge – real knowledge – continues. The Dark Ages of the 20th century begin to lift and Dreamtime subsides. Information about free-markets continues to spread. Are these trends reversible? I Don’t think so.


I pray that Anthony’s last optimistic “I don’t think so” comment is indicative of future events, as I firmly believe that an obsessive and insatiable appetite, for knowledge must become a global pandemic overnight, if we are to stop the global bankers evil empire. TIME IS RUNNING OUT!



By Marilyn M. Barnewall

June 19, 2011

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

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

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

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

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

Many readers have not yet heard of Agenda 21, also known as Sustainable Development, though columnists Tom DeWeese and Dr. Michael Coffman, two of the nation’s journalistic experts on the topic, write of it. In a recent article, DeWeese provided some quotes of individuals involved with ICLEI. This should explain ICLEI’s philosophy quite clearly:

“Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” -Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI. The Wildlands Project

“We must make this place an insecure and inhospitable place for Capitalists and their projects – we must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness tens of millions of acres or presently settled land.” -Dave Foreman, Earth First.”

The entire DeWeese article can be found here.

If you haven’t been reading about Agenda 21, you’d better start… unless you dislike owning private property or prefer city living to a more rural country setting. Maybe you own a small farm or orchard. If you do and aren’t aware of Agenda 21, you are probably unwittingly participating in the demise of your own lifestyle.

Perhaps you’re more familiar with the name “George Soros” than with “ICLEI.” Well, guess who funds parts of ICLEI? In 1997, Soros’s Open Society gave ICLEI $2,137,415 to support its Local Agenda programs. This same Soros group – Open Society – has destabilized and overturned several nations… Yugoslovia in 2000, Georgia in 2003, and Ukraine in 2004. Bringing a mere American city or county to his way of socialist thinking points out how well Soros has schooled himself in the communist philosophies of Antonio Gramsci who said to seek out the emotionally ill and socially abused to achieve global government objectives. Even Mussolini feared the power of Gramsci’s philosophies and had him imprisoned.

ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA is devoted to cities and counties engaged in sustainability, climate protection, and clean energy initiatives. They represent, among others, the Greenies of the world – those wanting to eliminate any job having to do with fossil fuels (it doesn’t bother them that international economies still rely on fossil fuels; “People will adjust,” is their mantra – “Many people will die while they are adjusting” is my mantra). ICLEI followers recently met and decided that rocks and weeds should have equal rights with humans. It takes the word “anthropomorphic” to a new level.

The Rio + 20 meeting that is upcoming in 2012 celebrates the 20 year anniversary of Agenda 21, created in Rio in 1992. Yes. Most of the unwanted changes in your American lifestyle result from decisions made and included in Agenda 21. The words “sustainable development” came from that meeting… and ICLEI to which many of your communities belong is devoted to those very changes you hate. And your tax dollars are paying for the destruction of your values and your prior lifestyle.

Why do you allow it?

The Soros plan uses operatives to infiltrate countries. They talk about things that sound SO humanitarian – clean air, good schools, saving the forests, making our water clean … everything any sane person responds to positively. He insists on an “independent media” (meaning one that broadcasts news and views that supports his communist philosophy), and works to destabilize the nation by manipulating business and finance – his destruction of the Bank of England serves as a good example (and he’s working overtime on our banking system).

His current attempt to destroy both the dollar and the euro is another. The last phase of the Soros strategy is to take to the streets with activists… we’ve seen that with the Wisconsin union protests – Wisconsin Democrat legislators hiding in Illinois during activist demonstrations.

One of the things ICLEI supports is sustainable management of “open spaces.” They don’t bother to tell you that as of this moment the “open spaces” they want is private property belonging to people who live there. The plan is to herd the current residents on that land into major metropolitan centers – your state’s biggest cities – and off of the land those people own. Monsanto can do a much better job of farming their genetically altered fruits and vegetables than family farmers can, after all.

ICLEI helps communities plan how to use the newly vacated/stolen land – they figure out who will use it, and how. They want no human footprints in rural areas. They achieve this objective through highly-regulated land use.

The ICLEI open spaces plan merges nicely with what Barrack Obama and Joe Biden call “high-speed rail” programs. For over two years, I have questioned why they call what are obviously rapid transit programs “high-speed rail.” The more I understand about the Agenda 21 plan to remove people from the land and move them into buildings – pack ‘em and stack ‘em condos, as they’re called — the more I understand about Obama’s “high-speed rail” boondoggle. There will be no cars on the streets – there will be no room for them (and the “Green” version of cars is so costly, those who work for a living can’t afford them, anyway).

There will be the ideal “Green” environment where rocks and trees enjoy the same rights human beings do. You can walk, ride a bicycle or take mass transit to work… from your multi-story condominium.

The “social engineering” of communism confiscates land and homes for agriculture. Don’t take my word for it. Read the history of Russia. The communists forced people to move into multi-storied apartments and they commuted by bicycles or public transit – which, of course, creates the need for rapid transit programs (Obama likes to call them “high-speed rail” so it sounds like he’s trying to compete effectively with China).

The idiots from the United Nations who created Agenda 21’s Sustainable Development plans in Rio in 1992 believe that what they offer is “smart growth plans.” The Environmental Protection Agency is very involved and can deny grants to states and cities and impose other penalties on those that reject their offers… again, a violation of States Rights.

Agenda 21 will be 20 years old in 2012. George H.W. Bush (and 177 other world leaders) agreed to it in 1992. Bush Senior was the first world leader to use the words “New World Order” – and America hasn’t been the same since. I don’t trust a single thing the man did while serving as Director of the CIA, the Vice President, or as the President.

The U.S. Senate rejected the Agenda 21 Treaty, but Bill Clinton signed Executive Order #12858, creating a Presidential Council on ‘Sustainable Development.’ This effectively pushed the UN plan into America’s large, churning government machine without the need for any review or discussion by Congress or the American people.

The American people need to elect a Congress that will put some reins on Executive Orders. What the Congress willingly avoids, Presidents pass through the power of Executive Orders. That, in turn, effectively by-passes all of the Constitutional protections put in place by our founding fathers relative to the balance of power between the judicial, the executive and the legislative branches of government.

How does Agenda 21 impact you? If you’ve purchased a new washing machine, you’ve already had some experience with it. The new eco-friendly washers provide too little water and clothes don’t get washed (or rinsed) well. If you want a decent washing machine, get one now because soon, thanks to ICLEI programs, you’ll be stuck with the eco-friendly variety – just as you’ve been stuck with phosphate-free laundry detergent and toilets that don’t flush.

Or, perhaps you live in a part of the country that already has energy intrusion capacity. This neat ICLEI program – destined to be a hit with all – allows your local utility company to determine the temperature in your home through “smart grid” technology. If it’s too warm, they can turn your thermostat down; if too cool (by their standards, not yours), they can turn the air conditioning down.

These things aren’t “coming soon.” They are happening “now.” What do you do about it? Get a petition signed preventing cities and counties in your state from spending your tax dollars on ICLEI membership. Go to the City Council or County Commissioner meetings and give your elected officials hell for violating your constitutional rights!

Living a bare-bones, waste not-want not, “sustainable” lifestyle entails having your life and the lives of your loved ones micromanaged through an internationally governed system of laws and mandates purportedly designed to ensure the equitable redistribution of wealth, but which, in truth, will totally destroy our Republic and our U.S. Constitution and all the protection it was designed to give to the American people.

As the old saying goes (my saying): Nothing is going to change as long as you sit on your butt.

© 2011 Marilyn M. Barnewall – All Rights Reserved