Categories » ‘DYSFUNCTIONAL EDUCATION’
October 9th, 2015 by olddog
By Andrew P. Napolitano
While the FBI continued to analyze the emails Hillary Clinton thought she deleted and her advisers pressed her to hire a Republican criminal defense attorney in Washington, a madman used a lawfully purchased handgun to kill a professor and eight students at a community college in Roseburg, Oregon. Looking to change the subject away from her emails, Clinton was quick to pounce.
She who has ripped into Republicans for seeking political gain from the four American deaths in Benghazi, Libya, now seeks her own political gain from the dozens of murdered children and young adults in Newtown, Connecticut, and Roseburg. On the heels of the latter and referring to both tragedies, she launched an emotional attack early this week on the two most recent Supreme Court decisions upholding the personal right to keep and bear arms. She offered to “fix” them should she be elected president.
Her so-called fix consists of a dead-on-arrival legislative proposal making gun manufacturers financially liable for the misuse of their products and an executive order determining the meaning of certain words used in federal statutes.
The liability-shifting proposal is akin to punishing General Motors whenever a drunken driver misuses his Chevy and injures someone. The courts would surely reject that.
The executive order proposal assaults the Constitution. Those in the gun sale business must conduct background checks via computer services offered by the FBI. The background checks look for reports of crimes of violence, domestic violence and mental illness. Private people who occasionally sell their hardware or give guns as gifts are exempt from conducting background checks. Clinton would create a presidentially written and mandated definition of occasional sales and gifts so as to require background checks for all gun transfers — a requirement Congress rejected.
We are 13 months from Election Day 2016, and Clinton has already promised that she would rule by pen and phone rather than govern by consensus.
As a lawyer, Clinton should know that only the federal courts — not the president — can decide what statutory language means. Moreover, if she knew anything about FBI background checks, she would know that they are only as good as the database on which they rely. If a madman hides his mental illness, no database will reveal it.
Her attacks on the Supreme Court decisions were direct. She rejects their characterization of the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental right — meaning that it is akin to thought, speech, press, association, worship, travel, etc.
Yet if she were to become president, she would take an oath to uphold the Constitution; that means the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. The presidential oath of office would require that she execute her duties “faithfully” — whether she agrees with the law or constitutional provision or not. She apparently has no intention of fulfilling the presidential oath of office.
We are 13 months from Election Day 2016, and Clinton has already promised that she would not enforce Supreme Court decisions with which she disagrees.
What did both the Newtown and the Roseburg tragedies have in common? Both murderers were madmen. Yet neither had a record of mental illness, so the background checks the anti-self-defense lobby loves would not have prevented either of these killers from buying a gun and using it to murder indiscriminately. If killers are prepared to murder innocent children, does Clinton really think they would obey the laws regulating gun ownership?
Both mass murders occurred in no-gun zones. A no-gun zone is the most dangerous place on the planet when a madman intent on killing enters. No-gun zones are arbitrarily designated on public property by local authorities, stripping law-abiding folks of their lawfully owned guns — their natural right to self-defense — and exposing them to terror and death.
The Constitution does not permit public no-gun zones any more than it does public no-free-speech zones. If the right to keep and bear arms is truly fundamental, the government cannot interfere with it based on geography. If the Army veteran/college student who stopped seven bullets with his body last week and saved the lives of his classmates (and survived!) had been permitted to carry a gun into the school building, the madman who murdered nine innocents would have been stopped long before police arrived — long before he completed his killings.
The right to keep and bear arms has more than just the Second Amendment to protect it. By characterizing the right as fundamental and pre-political, the high court accepted the truism that this right is merely a modern extension of the ancient right to self-defense. And the right to defend oneself does not come from the government; it comes from our humanity. It is a natural right.
Who among us, when confronted with the terror of nearly certain annihilation, would concern himself with the niceties of the law? Life itself is at stake. The right to self-defense is a manifestation of the natural instinct for survival, borne in the hearts of all rational people.
But Hillary Clinton rejects that instinct because she prefers we become dependent upon the government — as long as she is running it.
The police cannot stop mass killings, because they cannot be everywhere all the time. And madmen willing to kill do not fear being lawbreakers. Guns in the hands of the people give not only tyrants second thoughts but also madmen.
Even madmen fear an early death.
Why do so many people worry about their right to carry a weapon when all one needs is the balls to do what you want and believe is right! I will and always have carried a weapon, and no laws are going to make me stop. I consider the Ten Commandments are all that I need to live a respectable life. I do not kill people just because I hate them, or OBUMA would be history. So what’s the problem folks, besides being stupid enough to believe that governments are always right! If we all refused to support laws we don’t believe are right, and relied on ourselves instead of our government, we would not have so many idiots demanding their brain farts be considered law. Nuff said!
October 8th, 2015 by olddog
By Brandon Smith
The high priests of academic and “official” history love a good villain for two reasons: First, because good official villains make the struggles and accomplishments of good official heroes even more awe-inspiring. And, second, because nothing teaches (or propagandizes) the masses more thoroughly than the social or political lessons inherent in the documented rise and fall of the world’s most despicable inhabitants. We get shivers of fear and excitement when we discuss the evils and the follies of ancient monsters like Nero, Attila the Hun, Caligula, etc, or more modern monsters, like Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, Goebbels, Mao, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, and so on. We take solace in the idea that “we are nothing like them”, and our nation has “moved beyond” such animalistic behavior.
But even more fascinating popcorn-style history is found not in the destruction of tyrants, but the destruction of empires.
When an entire culture steps off the edge of the abyss into the realm of societal psychosis, the world often changes forever and in ways that, at least on the surface, seem to bring humanity a little closer together. The fall of Rome led to the eventual rise of a dominant Catholic theocracy and the rulership of royal blood lineage that lasted for centuries in Europe. The flames of World War I and the destabilization of the Kaiser’s Germany led to the formation of the League Of Nations; a first attempt at a global governing authority designed to “maintain world peace”. World War II and the fall of the Third Reich resulted in considerable horrors, which the establishment of the United Nations was supposedly meant to prevent from ever occurring again. The decline of the British Empire saw the implosion of cultural colonialism, and the rise of corporate colonialism, which centralized immense power into the hands of the banking class as the new official oligarchs of our modern era. The collapse of the Berlin Wall and the abandonment of the Soviet Union was lauded by then U.S. President George Bush as the beginnings of a “New World Order” – an ideological concept which heralds the final deterioration of the idea of economic and political sovereignty as a mainstay of human civilization.
When examining the approved version of historical conflict, one gets the overwhelming impression that the villains of our past, through their hubris, their greed, and their insanity, seem to inspire a sudden surge of unification as their ashes are cleared from the air. One might even come to believe that the “natural progression” of conflict is leading us towards a future in which the only solution is the dissolution of all boundaries and the adoption of a one world narrative. Wouldn’t it be glorious if the deaths of these malevolent tyrants and societies finally inspired the birth of a single human system in which no conflict is possible because we are all on the same side?
Perhaps it would be glorious, if you have adopted the childish notions of history common to the mainstream. For those who have not, the story, and the ultimate solutions to the ills of mankind, become a little more complicated…
America‘s Villainous Mustache
Mainstream history tends to follow the motions of a play or film, in that archetypes and symbolic figures are consistently created in order to satisfy the natural flow of a particular fiction. The bad guy wears a mustache (not always, but it is strange and disturbing to see how often this archetype materializes in the mainstream world view. Just look at Hitler, Stalin, Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Muammar Gaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, etc. We love mustached villains). His criminal successes make him imposing and frightening. He acts without conscience, or, he wrongly believes his terrible actions are justified in the name of the “greater good”. His inevitable mistakes make his final failure ironic and satisfying in the face of the iconic hero, who defeats the enemy while the citizenry stands back and watches in awe and wonder as helpless spectators.
The villain is indeed evil, and deserves to be dethroned, but the assumption many people make is that the other side is diametrically good. This is not always the case…
America is used to playing the role of the hero in the epic tale of modern Earth. Our nation began with an act of defiance and victory so unexpected and so poetic, it cemented our cultural identity as freedom fighters for centuries to come. Over time, our government, turning progressively corrupt, has exploited this cultural identity in order to lure Americans into committing atrocities in the name of our traditional sense of “heroism”. We have, in fact, become the very antagonists we thought we were fighting against (there’s the delicious irony needed to round out our fairytale).
Our government’s actions surrounding Syria, for instance, have made America appear not just bloodthirsty, but also ridiculous. The Obama Administration has taken us to the brink of World War III and left us there to stare out over the chasm. The slightest breeze could send us plummeting. All to generate military support for Al-Qaeda, the same organization designated by the establishment as our mortal enemy.
In the meantime, our economic system now survives solely on the whims of the Federal Reserve, a private central bank that answers to NO ONE, and writes fiscal policy without oversight. The government is not only seeking to trigger world war, it also wants to pay for that war with money we do not have, riding debts we cannot pay, to foreign creditors we will piss off in the process of unleashing our unfunded laser guided hell.
Never has the U.S. been slathered in so much absurdity all at once. Now, we wear the mustache…
Most of us in the Liberty Movement would agree that our country is being poisoned from within, and that our government for many decades has become an enemy of all free peoples. But there is a very important question that we seem to have overlooked:
If America has been written as the villain, then who is meant to be the hero?
Putin Is Not Your Buddy
Lets step back from the global stage for a moment and examine the situation from a different perspective. What if the U.S. is not just a product of corruption for corruption’s sake? What if our new identity as the next historical evil-doer is part of a greater script, and America’s fall from grace is meant to be used to foment the success of fantastic (but fake) protagonists in an engineered fight for a “better and more centralized world”?
How many of us in the Liberty Movement cheered the diplomatic and strategic prowess of Vladimir Putin, for example, in the days leading to Obama’s “red line” attack on Syria? We cheered because his position was correct, and his demeanor made our government look homicidal by comparison. We cheered his letter to TIME Magazine because we are tired of being the only people pointing out the vicious parasite our political body has become, and it was exciting to be vindicated by an outside source. We cheered his protection of Edward Snowden, a truly courageous whistle blower that exposed the terrifying Orwellian nature of the NSA. We watch video reports from Russia Today (RT) because they give a far more accurate accounting of the facts in the U.S. than all American media entities combined. It is easy for us to get caught up in the idea that since the West has become the bad guy, the East must now be the good guy.
The problem is, we are being played yet again.
Putin has long called for the end of the dollar’s world reserve status and the creation of a new “global structure” and a “global currency” revolving around the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights:
Is it just coincidence that Putin wants the same centralized global economy and global governance that the IMF and multiple banking elites have been calling for for years? The same elites who created the debt crisis and currency crisis we now face in America? Is it just coincidence that Eastern economic and political dominance over issues like Syria perfectly benefits the IMF plan for an financial shift to the BRICS nations and away from the U.S. greenback? The same plan promoted by many American financial moguls?
Russia is a model for despotic socialized society posing as “civilized society”, and yet, our government has made America so ugly that Russia looks noble by comparison. Putin is placed on the cover of TIME magazine everywhere in the world except the U.S., and the Washington Times responds by stating that such behavior is a sign of “America’s downward spiral in the global community”, as if we are about to be shunned from the world at large:
While RT produces fantastic journalistic pieces that are critical of American government, rarely if ever do they turn a discerning eye to Russia, and this is not just oversight.
Look carefully at the narrative that is being constructed here. Putin is NOT our buddy. He represents exactly what our own government now represents; globalism and naked centralized government aggression against the individual. However, as mainstream history is being written, the story will be told that it was nations like Russia and China, and organizations like the IMF, that tried to hold back the tide of catastrophe while America, the last empire, steamrolled into thick-skulled oblivion surfing on a shockwave of fiat money and brute military vanity.
The Washington Aristocracy Is Scum, But Don’t Let That Fool You…
Most people with an extensive Liberty Movement education are well aware that false paradigms are used in politics by establishment elites in order to control social discussion and to divide the population against each other. The Left/Right debate has been and always will be a farce, being that the leadership on both sides of the aisle have identical goals when it comes to the most important aspects of the American structure. The elites of the Democratic and Republican parties, regardless of rhetoric, will BOTH strive for greater government power, less individual liberty, the erasure of economic sovereignty and free markets, and a dependent and enslaved public. On these pursuits, they completely agree.
In one week, our faux leadership is to decide once AGAIN on the possibility of a debt ceiling increase that will bring us ever closer to a debt and currency avalanche event. During past debates, much fanfare is given to the supposed conflict between the interests of the Democrats and the GOP, up until the last moment when the GOP caves in completely and allows the debt ceiling to be vaulted. Will the same happen again in this case? It depends on how quickly the establishment wants to bring entire roof down on our heads.
A freeze of the debt ceiling would eventually mean default on our Treasury Bonds, since our government must take on exponential debt in order to receive the benefits of the Federal Reserve’s printing press, as well as pay off our foreign creditors.
A government shutdown could slow the growth of some liabilities, but it does not account for the liabilities already in circulation, thus, we can still default. Not to mention, our debt and currency standing could easily come into question, resulting in a bond dump or loss of reserve status.
The only option that does not result in a fast moving firestorm through our financial system is a debt ceiling increase, and how much longer can we get away with kicking the can down the road? In any case, America is about to change for the worse, and the decision on when this is to happen was made a long time ago. The Washington aristocracy is blatantly guilty in the instigation of our current dilemma, and my theory is, they want you to know they are the culprit, as long as you continue believing they are the ONLY culprit. They want you to forget all about the IMF, the corporate elites, and Vladimir Putin’s involvement in the larger plan. They want you to cheer when international banks and what’s left of the G20 rescue us after years of fiscal disaster and institute centralized global economic governance. They want to be the only authors of this story, and what author doesn’t want to see himself placed in the role of the champion?
Just as there are false political paradigms, there are also false international paradigms. The Liberty Movement is the wild card; an unknown quantity. We aren’t fighting for one side or the other – we are fighting for particular principles and beliefs. The establishment’s best strategy is to co-opt our momentum by convincing us to focus on alternative opposition, or place our trust in fabricated advocates. No matter how epically monstrous our government becomes, and no matter how satisfying their ultimate demise will be, our battle does not end with them. It only begins with them.
You can contact Brandon Smith at: firstname.lastname@example.org
Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.
To contribute to the growth of the Safe Haven Project, and to help us help others in relocating, or to support the creation of barter networks across the country, visit our donate page here:
Silver and Gold are on their way back to historic highs, and now is the time to buy. LetLibertyCPM.com help you decide how to best protect your savings and insulate you from an ever destabilizing dollar.
Do you need long term food storage but want the best quality as well? The good people at Nuvona Premium Foods are offering discounts on their Non-GMO food storage for Alt-Market readers only! Take advantage of this incredible deal while it lasts!
Do you have enough Non-GMO seeds in case of economic collapse? Seeds are the OTHER alternative currency, and if you aren’t stocked, then you aren’t prepared. To buy top quality non-GMO seeds at a special 10% discount, visit Humble Seed, and use the code Alt10
October 7th, 2015 by olddog
By Dave Hodges
Edited by Olddog
All discussions with regard to gun ownership begin and end with the Second Amendment. The views of President Obuma on this issue are irrelevant to any discussion about private gun ownership.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
The second part of the Second Amendment speaks for itself when the Constitution says: ” The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This is the final word on the subject as the Constitution has clearly spoken. Obama’s rants and illegal Executive
Obuma and his half-brother, Malik Obama, the arms procurement director for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Orders do not matter with regard to any debate on gun ownership. The Constitution is inviolate to the Marxist-socialist whims of any one President, especiallyObuma. Obuma’s half brother, Malik Obuma, is the head of arms procurement for the terrorist organization we call the Muslim Brotherhood. And to the best of my knowledge, Obuma has never publicly repudiated this.
Brian Terry killed by a “Fast and Furious” gun supplied to the drug cartels by the Obuma administration.
Subsequently, Obuma is fine with terrorists owning guns, just not the American people. And just in case you may have forgotten your recent history, Obuma’s administration got caught sending guns to the Mexican drug cartels in Operation Fast and Furious. But again, Obuma, who arms drug cartel members, would deprive American citizens of the same right.
Not convinced? Please read on….Who will ever forget when CBS released documents that implicated Holder, who used the BATF as he tried to undermine the Second Amendment, by shipping guns into Mexico and hoping that that the worst would happen and the fatalities would be blamed on the Second Amendment. However, the worst did happen, but not in the form desired by Holder as Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry, was killed with one of these guns. Instead of getting the desired result, Holder drew the ire of the American people, at least those who are awake. Make no mistake about it, this was a gun control agenda.
The New York Daily News Needs to be Boycotted Until This Communist Rag Fails.
The New York Daily News is demanding that the State Department declare the National Rifle Association to be a terrorist organization. This press release was issued two days following the shooting which took the life of 10 people on the Umpqua Community College campus.
Anyone who buys a copy of the New York Daily News, the America version of Pravda, is aiding and abetting the overthrow of the Constitution.
The Common Sense Show agrees wholeheartedly Breitbart and the NRA in support of the following statement by the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre when he said “…Politicians pass laws for Gun-Free School Zones. They issue press releases bragging about them. They post signs advertising them. And in so doing, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are their safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk.” (EDITOR’S NOTE: GUN FREE ZONES IS WHERE PEOPLE GO TO DIE. THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD HAVE SAVED THE STUDENTS AT THE OREGON COMMUNITY COLLEGE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE PRESENCE OF ARMED GUARDS. THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD HAVE SAVED THE LIVES OF THE COLUMBINE STUDENTS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE PRESENCE OF ARMED GUARDS.)
How have our nation’s priorities gotten so far out of order? Think about it. We care more about our money, so we protect our banks with armed guards. American airports, office buildings, power plants, courthouses — even sports stadiums — are all protected by armed security.
We care about the office of President, so we protect him with armed Secret Service agents.
…Yet when it comes to the most beloved, innocent and vulnerable members of the American family — our children — we as a society leave them utterly helpless, and the monsters and predators of this world know it and exploit it. That must change now!”
Clinton and Obama On Gun Control
Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s position on gun control puts her at odds with the staunchly pro-gun GOP, and the push for gun control laws at the federal level has been historically unsuccessful. Source: Wall Street Journal, “Anywhere, Anytime Gun Culture” , May 6, 2014
President Obuma’s views on gun control are decidedly turning to gun confiscation as he cited his desire to follow in the footsteps of Australia and Great Britain.
“We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it”. President Obuma
It is now crystal clear, the President plans to take our guns!
History Speaks Will American Listen?
History shows that bad things — very bad things — happen when a government confiscates the guns of its citizens. It is an undisputed fact that gun control and gun confiscation has preceded every instance of genocide in the 20th century. How quickly we forget the lessons of history, or, perhaps we never bothered to learn the true lessons of history in the first place.
If we ever allow government to subvert the Second Amendment, we very well could be witnessing a prelude to an American genocide for specific targeted groups, for there is nothing as dangerous to a totalitarian regime as an educated and well-armed populace.
What Happens After Gun Confiscation?
Before we passively allow the Obuma administration strip away our last line of defense from an increasingly totalitarian government, by acquiescing to the United Nations and American advocates for gun control, perhaps we should examine the end game resulting from past gun control efforts:
- In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves against their ethnic-cleansing government, were arrested and exterminated.
- In 1929, the former Soviet Union established gun control as a means of controlling the “more difficult” of their citizens. From 1929 to the death of Stalin, 40 million Soviets met an untimely end at the hand of various governmental agencies as they were arrested and exterminated.
- After the rise of the Nazi’s, Germany established their version of gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves against the “Brown Shirts”, were arrested and exterminated. Interestingly, the Brown Shirts were eventually targeted for extermination themselves following their blind acts of allegiance to Hitler. Any American military and police would be wise to grasp the historical significance of the Brown Shirts’ fate.
- After Communist China established gun control in 1935, an estimated 50 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves against their fascist leaders, were arrested and exterminated.
- Closer to home, Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayans, unable to defend themselves against their ruthless dictatorship, were arrested and exterminated.
- Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves from their dictatorial government, were arrested and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million of the “educated” people, unable to defend themselves against their fascist government, were arrested and exterminated.
- In 1994, Rwanda disarmed the Tutsi people and being unable to defend themselves from their totalitarian government, nearly one million were summarily executed.
The total numbers of victims who lost their lives because of gun control is approximately 70 million people in the 20th century. The historical voices from 70 million corpses speak loudly and clearly to those Americans who are advocating for a de facto gun ban. Governments murdered four times as many civilians as were killed in all the international and domestic wars combined. Governments murdered millions more people than were killed by common criminals and it all followed gun control.
- Commissar Obama Has Been On a Mission to Seize American Guns Since His Election
- In the 1970’s, the civilized world criticized the Soviet Union for their designation of a new mental illness called “Political Schizophrenia”. Soviet style political schizophrenia was deemed to be inappropriate by ICD-9 because the Russians were labeling anyone who disagreed with the government as being mentally ill. And in Mother Russia, if you were deemed to be mentally ill, you were subsequently “treated” in the Gulag.
Obuma Employs Soviet Style Mental Health Gun Controls
Under Obuma’s new proposed gun regulations, anyone who has a diagnosable, or is potentially diagnosable for being mentally ill, can have their gun confiscated. Vice President Biden even feels that they can violate HIPPA privacy regulations in requiring the states to report who has been treated for a mental illness.
What is interesting to me is that the Obuma administration is not even trying to distinguish between mental illnesses in terms of who should, or should not own a gun. In the eyes of the Obuma administration, all mental illnesses are created equal. A person with a phobia is just as dangerous as a sociopath. One in six Americans has a “diagnosable anxiety disorder”. This is completely understandable given the economic and political times that we live in. However, under the new proposed guidelines, all of these people would be ineligible to have a gun in their possession even though there is not a shred of research which indicates this population would be inclined towards gun violence any more than any other population.
Psychiatric Guidelines to Judge Mental Illness
The Obuma administration has a new partner in crime and it is the American Psychiatric Association (APA). The APA created the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (5th Edition) which was recently adopted. DSM 5 is highly controversial and has sparked outrage from the mental health practitioners. As many of these practitioners point out, the new DSM-V makes a pathology out of simple and normal behaviors such as the grieving for the loss of a loved one.
Particularly disturbing is that the new manual targets internet users as conspiracy theorists. If someone is judged, by some vague set of criteria, to spend too much time on the internet, they could be judged to be mentally ill and ineligible to own a gun. How are you receiving this information? The chances are that you are, at least according to Obuma and Biden, giving in to your internet addiction and reading this article. Under the new Obuma guidelines this would be grounds for gun confiscation. The alternative media is predicated on internet readership and listenership. These would be among the first groups to oppose a martial law crackdown. Subsequently, this is just another backdoor method to disarm citizens who would oppose the abject tyranny being imposed upon America. And these facts sum up what is truly behind the Obama administration’s latest attack upon gun ownership because they want to prey upon a defenseless nation by disarming as many of us as possible before the purges can begin in earnest.
This is the new political schizophrenia. We will see confinements among the alternative media and the veterans for things like ADHD, grieving, normal anxiety, bad eating habits, etc. All of these behaviors and more have been categorized as pathologies under the Obuma administration and a supportive American Psychiatric Association. Any trick in the book to get our guns, isn’t that correct Commissar Obuma
Secretary of State, John Kerry, signing away America’s freedom, security and longevity by putting his name on the UN Smalls Arms Treaty in violation of the Constitution which states that any treaty must be approved by the Senate on a two-thirds vote.
Don’t forget that Secretary of State, John Kerry, signed the UN gun confiscation treaty with Obuma’s full support. The entire OBuma administration has been about seizing our guns. Why? What do they have planned that they are afraid of the private ownership of guns?
Perhaps we should listen to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, when he lamented from the Gulag that they did not forcibly resist the rogue government that would eventually imprison them. There is wisdom in his words when he said “we did not love freedom enough”, or we would have resisted by whatever means possible.
- Listen up Obuma, America will not make the same mistake as Sozenhenitsyn and His Russian Comrades
- The Obuma administration is on a very slippery slope. The American people will not tolerate the evisceration of the Constitution, in particular, the Second Amendment. Again, I say, as did the Texans told Mexico nearly two centuries ago. And as the Minutemen at Lexington and Concord said to the British when they were told to surrender their arms.
LISTEN UP OBUMA! Although we are a diverse and divided population, many of us know you don’t give a shit about the victims of these shooting’s you probably approved, and we know you hate us with as much passion as we hate you, but we do not kill people for vengeance or hatred, we kill people who try to oppress us and or kill us. That’s called self defense asshole. So, knowing this, you are obviously intent on causing a guerrilla war in America. You have been brainwashed from your childhood to hate freedom, and people capable of managing they’re own lives without government control. Even if the majority of Americans were weak-kneed slobs afraid of every shadow, we will not surrender our God Given Right of self defense. NOT NOW, NOT EVER! Why would any sane American give the very government who wants to kill us the weapons we need to survive? Dying in the act of self defense is not something we fear, so come and take them asshole! But of course you are too chicken shit to do it yourself, so you will send some brain washed punks to do your dirty work. Please have them bring plenty of body-bags for their comrades!
October 6th, 2015 by olddog
By James Corbett
October 6, 2015
Last-minute negotiations over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) deal in Atlanta this past week finally ended on Monday when trade ministers emerged with a deal. It’s a testament to the secrecy and apathy that has surrounded the entire TPP process that most people didn’t even know these negotiations were taking place, let alone that a deal was near. Nevertheless, the completed deal is now on its way to member countries for ratification.
So what is the deal? Who is behind it? Why are so many opposed to it? And what’s next? Here’s a primer on what you need to know as the TPP deal enters the home stretch.
What is it?
The TPP is a so-called “free trade agreement” that is the largest such deal since NAFTA. If ratified it will cover 12 countries, impacting over 400 million people and nearly 40% of the world’s GDP. Member nations of the TPP negotiations include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam.
What does it do?
We do know that the TPP agreement is a 30 chapter document dealing with everything from agricultural tariffs to intellectual property to wildlife conservation to customs and financial services. It will impact the auto industry, dairy farmers, pharmaceutical companies (and their patients), even people who share files online. In short, it is a comprehensive agreement.
We do not know what the text actually says. We have a rough idea based on leaked drafts of previous negotiating texts and the pronouncements of various officials privy to the talks and the ridiculously vague summaries of the US Trade Representative and other official bodies, but the text itself has yet to be released for public consumption.
This is a reflection of the unprecedented secrecy that has shrouded these negotiations, including restricting members of US Congress’ access to the negotiating text to classified briefings and basement readings and paramilitary security with helicopter surveillancepatrolling TPP summits for would-be protesters.
In a word: business. No, not mom and pop corner store business, big multinational corporate business. But you probably could have guessed as much already. After all, there’s a reason the US Business Coalition for TPP existed, let alone spent over $1.1 million buying off Congressmen ahead of the “Fast Track” trade authority vote earlier this year.
Hollywood and the MPAA can celebrate more stringent international enforcement of their “intellectual property” to bolster their failing business model. Big Pharma likewise will benefit from mores string enforcement of their patents to prevent smaller countries from selling generic copies of their signature drugs. American dairy farmers are winners, gaining greater access to Canadian markets. American manufacturers will win as relaxed rules make it even easier to ship jobs to developing Asian countries. Vietnamese manufacturers benefit from that outsourcing even as they dodge the “labor organization” bullet.
In every case, the clear common denominator is that big business is going to win big time if the deal gets through.
Pretty much everyone else. That’s why you’ll see an extraordinary range of people opposed to this deal, from the mainstream left (Hillary Clinton) and the mainstream right (Mike Huckabee) to the controlled “alternative” left (Noam Chomsky) and the controlled “alternative” right (The New American) to libertarians and environmental groups and trade unions and basically everyone who isn’t in favor of crony capitalism. Only a truly bad deal could bring together such a disparate bunch. And this deal is bad.
Vaguely worded agreements to standardize the protection of “trade secrets” threaten toundermine whistleblowers and journalists who are trying to expose corruption and counter needless secrecy.
A “three-step test” for approving member nations’ copyright limitations legislation threatens to make much of the open source / fair use reporting done by The Corbett Report and others illegal, or legally onerous to perform.
It threatens to introduce criminal sanctions on file sharers who are deemed to share on a vaguely defined “commercial scale” (perhaps including posting a link to a YouTube video on a blog).
Doctors Without Borders has been uncharacteristically vocal on this political issue, unequivocally stating that the TPP deal is “a bad deal for medicine.” (Some theorize this position earned them an unwelcome visit from the US military in Afghanistan.)
The list goes on and on, but one thing is certain: wage laborers, small businesses and others ‘too small to succeed’ can all find something to hate in this agreement.
In the US, Obama will not be able to sign the deal for 90 days, and it will be a month or more after that before the legislation to implement the deal is introduced in the house. This means the process will take months to complete, and likely come to a head in the heat of the 2016 sElection cycle.
And that’s just the US. Canada is likewise heading into an election this month and one of the main opposition parties has already stated that they will not feel bound by the deal. The Abe government in Japan, already reeling from public protest over recently passed “security” legislation to remilitarize the country, is facing a huge backlash from its farm lobby over the opening up of long-protected Japanese agricultural produce markets.
If there is any good news on the horizon, it’s that the deal’s ratification is still up in the air, with many being pessimistic of its chances in this politically volatile climate. But then, they said that about the negotiations themselves and look where that got us.
In the meantime, concerned men and women across the Pacific Rim collectively hold their breath for the full text in order to assess the potential damage.
Did Obama Bomb Doctors Without Borders For Opposing TPP?
TOPICS:AfghanistanClaire BernishHuman RightsObamaTPP
OCTOBER 5, 2015
October 5th, 2015 by olddog
By Mac Slavo
With the mounting police state surrounding modern day America, and numerous scenarios under which martial law, FEMA camps and civil war can be unleashed upon populations who dare to resist the federal takeover of the country, there is some good news.
Perhaps the flash points in Ferguson and Baltimore has put the question in front of everyone: do we want our police and law enforcement to become militarized, and to operate with the weapons of war?
Many states are fighting back and using local laws to cut police off from federal grants and military surplus equipment – including armored vehicles, grenade launchers, night vision goggles, weaponized drones and combat-configured aircraft.
Earlier this year, New Jersey passed a law requiring express local authorization for the receipt of military equipment under the Pentagon’s 1033 surplus program.
Now Montana is going even further by banning receipt of 1033 surplus military equipment altogether. Is this a major blow to the mounting police state?
As the Tenth Amendment Center reported:
Today, a law that will heavily diminish the impact of federal programs militarizing local police in Montana went into effect.
Introduced by Rep. Nicholas Schwaderer (R-Superior), House Bill 330 (HB330) bans state or local law enforcement from receiving significant classes of military equipment from the Pentagon’s “1033 Program.” It passed by a 46-1 vote in the state Senate and by a 79-20 vote in the state House. Gov. Steve Bullock signed the bill into law in April.
Schwaderer told the Bozeman Daily Chronicle he was a surprised Bullock signed the bill. He said he feared the governor would cave in to law enforcement lobbyists who opposed the legislation and veto the bill.
I’m incredibly pleased. In the latter part of the session you see so much partisanship so it’s heartening to see that both Democrats and Republicans could get behind it. It’s no lightweight bill. It substantially changes policy in a way that strengthens the civil liberties of Montanans.
The new law prohibits state or local law enforcement agencies from receiving armored drones, weaponized, or both; aircraft that are combat configured or combat coded; grenades or similar explosives and grenade launchers; silencers; and “militarized armored vehicles” from federal military surplus programs.
Montana’s HB330 also closes loopholes that allows local departments to purchase military equipment from Homeland Security using federal grant money – a procurement option that dwarfs the monetary value of transfers under the Pentagon’s program. According to the Tenth Amendment Center, police and LEOs aren’t totally barred from purchasing, but getting money at the local level won’t come without a fight (hence a good check on the alarming militarization around us today):
[Police departments and other law enforcement agencies] could continue to purchase them, but would have to use state or local funds, and the agencies would have to give public notice within 14 days of a request for any such local purchase.
“This foundation sets a massive precedent in Montana and the country as to what kind of society we want to have,” Schwaderer said of his bill. “If you get to the point where you need a grenade launcher, we’ve got the National Guard.”
“Arming ‘peace officers’ like they’re ready to occupy an enemy city is totally contrary to the society envisioned by the Founders,” said Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center. “They’ve turned ‘protect and serve’ into ‘command and control.’”
Though it is just one battle in the larger attempt to restore liberty and restrain tyranny, it is strong legislation for state rights.
via the Tenth Amendment Center: For other states: Take action to push back against federal militarization of your police HERE.
As SHTF previously reported, if you’re interested in what your local county has been stockpiling compliments of The Department of Homeland Security, a database from the military’s Defense Logistics Agency can help.
The Law Enforcement Support Office, under the 1033 program authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act, helps local police departments obtain military equipment for use in their cities… over 8,000 participating agencies have taken advantage of LESO offerings from the U.S. military and DHS since the program’s inception
Simply choose your State and your County and you’ll have complete access to see how well militarized your local and county police departments are:
Click here to load this Caspio Online Database.
Click here to launch the database in a new window for easier viewing.
(Secondary Link to Database Here)
‘The Republic is No More’ Ron Paul Warns: “Police brutality and militarization may induce a violent event far beyond Ferguson”
Database Shows What Military Equipment Your Local Police Department Has Been Stockpiling
The 17 Elements of Martial Law
This is a REAL Commercial from AARP: “Riots Nationwide Have Prompted The Government To Declare Martial Law”
If Martial Law Comes to America “Dissidents and Subversives Would Be Rounded Up”
Please Spread The Word And Share This Post
Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.
October 2nd, 2015 by olddog
By Philippe Gastonne
Two top Army generals recently discussed trying to kill an article in The New York Times on concussions at West Point by withholding information so the Army could encourage competing news organizations to publish a more favorable story, according to an Army document.
The generals’ conversation involved a Freedom of Information Act request that The Times made in June for data on concussions resulting from mandatory boxing classes at the United States Military Academy. The Times also requested similar data from the Air Force Academy in June, and from the Naval Academy this month.
During a Sept. 16 meeting at the Pentagon, the Army surgeon general, Lt. Gen. Patricia D. Horoho, recommended to the superintendent at West Point, Lt. Gen. Robert L. Caslen Jr., that the Army delay responding to The Times’s request, according to the document. General Horoho then suggested trying to get The Wall Street Journal or USA Today to publish an article about a more favorable Army study on concussions. – New York Times, Sept 29, 2015
When top generals talk about protecting military secrets, the average citizen will think some important subject must be at stake: troop movements, weapons capabilities, intelligence sources and the like. The public presumes its generals are men and women of integrity who take responsibility and tell the truth.
The public presumes wrong.
The New York Times decided to probe a relatively mild subject: concussions resulting from mandatory boxing classes at the three military academies. It filed Freedom of Information Act requests for data from the Army.
Instead of simply providing the data, two three-star generals conspired to delay its release until they could plant a favorable version of the story with other newspapers. They would have succeeded, too, had not one of their staff tipped off NYT on what happened.
Those facts bring several implications to mind.
First, why did the generals fear release of the concussion data? Do they want even more cadets to be injured? If not, they should welcome the opportunity to explain how they will both train the Army’s future leaders and keep them safe.
Second, someone who will hide the truth on a relatively minor topic is someone who will certainly hide the truth on topics that are more important. What else have Lt. Gens. Horoho and Caslen kept from the media? Have they delayed response to other FOIA responses in the past?
For Horoho, the answer is yes. Documents obtained by NYT show she talked about manipulating news coverage on treatment of wounded warriors in Colorado last year. She proudly said she had “killed any scrutiny from the media and killed their story.”
Third, why was Lt. Gen. Horoho so confident that the Wall Street Journal and USA Today would give the Army more favorable news coverage? Is it because they did so in the past? This ought to concern those who expect solid reporting and journalistic integrity.
Integrity is exactly what is missing from both sides of this equation. Military leaders don’t want the public seeing their mistakes, and reporters too often fail to press for answers.
The result is a public in the dark and more power for those on the inside. This is not a mistake. The system works exactly as intended.
October 1st, 2015 by olddog
By LAWRENCE SELLIN, PHD
The political-media establishment is desperately trying to run out the clock on Barack Hussein Obama, while continuing a deliberate policy to ignore credible evidence and divert any investigation that might expose their own complicity and negligence in the greatest fraud and Constitutional crisis in US history.
Stated simply, the political-media establishment knows it would not survive the revelation of what they themselves undoubtedly suspect – the distinct possibility of an illegal Presidency, one that has done more damage to the country than any of our enemies ever could.
The silence among the politicians is deafening. With the exception of Fox News, which is the propaganda arm of the Republican establishment and the Chamber of Commerce, the media are composed of partisan liberal activists, who control, manipulate, or even create news to support the Democrats and an extreme left-wing political agenda.
Obama succeeded in 2008 because the Republicans struck a deal with the Democrats not to question Obama’s eligibility for office and his personal history. Furthermore, the liberal media took radical steps to protect their favored candidate, killing negative stories about Obama and even threatening to accuse his opponents of racism in order to make them “sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.”
There are two Ayn Rand quotes that accurately sum up the current situation.
“The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see.”
“You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”
How is it possible that a President, on national television, could present as his official birth certificate, a digital image so riddled with obvious anomalies that only the counterfeiters themselves or the complicit could vouch for its authenticity, yet no one in authority says a word?
Evidence suggests that Barack Obama has been using a fraudulent Connecticut Social Security Number (SSN) since at least 1986. That number, 042-68-4425, issued in 1977, was set aside exclusively for Connecticut residents, a state in which he never lived nor did any member of his immediate family. In addition, SSN Verifier Plus showed the birth year 1890 linked to that number. Because SSNs are not re-issued, multiple birth dates for one card usually indicates a stolen number.
The data and documents associated with Obama’s Selective Service registration also appear to contain inconsistencies. Most noticeably, Obama’s registration card has a two digit year ‘80″ on the postal stamp, unlike the four digit year stamp “1980” found on all other registration cards completed at the same time in Hawaii and other states. It looks like a 2008 postal stamp was cut, the 08 inverted and reinserted into the stamp to mimic a 1980 registration. Interestingly, Obama’s alleged SSN 042-68-4425 appears on his 1980 Selective Service registration, which is six years before that number, associated with his name, can be found in personal background databases.
According to federal law, failure to register with the Selective Service would subject Obama to a possible fine and prison sentence and forever prevent him from working in the executive branch of the US government.
Despite the presence of probable cause, there is still no US government investigation, no outrage in the media and no demands for the truth from Congress. Skeptics of Obama’s “official” personal history were immediately derided as racists, rumormongers or conspiracy theorists.
This is how weird or perverted, the situation has become.
Using Saul Alinsky tactics in order to suppress any legitimate inquiry, the pejorative “birther” was coined and is used by reportedly paid Obama operatives directed out of the White House, who troll the internet to smear, denounce or ridicule anonymously whoever criticizes their ayatollah.
One might say, it is a liberal version of the Gestapo, a cowardly gaggle of otherwise unemployable girly-men and un-datable females working out of their mothers’ basements – a taxpayer-funded cash for trash program.
Make no mistake, however, the Republican establishment, either through complicity or fear, is completely intimidated by Obama and his acolytes and will neither oppose his policies nor seriously investigate the hundreds of questionable, unconstitutional or potentially criminal acts committed by him and members of his administration.
If we had honest government and objective journalism, Obama would still be an Illinois state senator voting “not present,” instead of wreaking havoc on an international scale.
As an act of self-preservation by political correctness, the political-media establishment has decided to avoid reality and not to see what is glaringly evident and the American people will continue to suffer the consequences until the country is cleansed of the corrupt status quo.
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of “Restoring the Republic: Arguments for a Second American Revolution “. He receives email at email@example.com.
September 30th, 2015 by olddog
By John W. Whitehead
September 22, 2015
“When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby talk, when, in short, a people become an audience and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk: culture-death is a clear possibility.”—Author Neil Postman
Caught up in the spectacle of the forthcoming 2016 presidential elections, Americans (never very good when it comes to long-term memory) have not only largely forgotten last year’s hullabaloo over militarized police, police shootings of unarmed citizens, asset forfeiture schemes, and government surveillance but are also generally foggy about everything that has happened since.
Then again, so much is happening on a daily basis that it’s understandable if the average American has a hard time keeping up with and remembering all of the “events,” manufactured or otherwise, which occur like clockwork and keep us distracted, deluded, amused, and insulated from reality while the government continues to amass more power and authority over the citizenry.
In fact, when we’re being bombarded with wall-to-wall news coverage and news cycles that change every few days, it’s difficult to stay focused on one thing—namely, holding the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law—and the powers-that-be understand this. As investigative journalist Mike Adams points out:
This psychological bombardment is waged primarily via the mainstream media which assaults the viewer by the hour with images of violence, war, emotions and conflict. Because the human nervous system is hard wired to focus on immediate threats accompanied by depictions of violence, mainstream media viewers have their attention and mental resources funneled into the never-ending ‘crisis of the NOW’ from which they can never have the mental breathing room to apply logic, reason or historical context.
Consider if you will the regularly scheduled trivia and/or distractions in the past year alone that have kept us tuned into the various breaking news headlines and entertainment spectacles and tuned out to the government’s steady encroachments on our freedoms:
Americans were riveted when the Republican presidential contenders went head-to-head for the second time in a three-hour debate that put Carly Fiorina in a favored position behind Donald Trump; Hillary Clinton presented the softer side of her campaign image during an appearance on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon; scientists announced the discovery of what they believed to be a new pre-human species, Homo naledi, that existed 2.8 million years ago; an 8.3 magnitude earthquake hit Chile; massive wildfires burned through 73,000 acres in California; a district court judge reversed NFL player Tom Brady’s four-game suspension; tennis superstar Serena Williams lost her chance at a calendar grand slam; and President Obama and Facebook mogul Mark Zuckerberg tweeted their support for a Texas student arrested for bringing a homemade clock to school.
That was preceded by the first round of the Republican presidential debates; an immigration crisis in Europe; the relaxing of Cuba-U.S. relations; the first two women soldiers graduating from Army Ranger course; and three Americans being hailed as heroes for thwarting a train attack in France. Before that, there was the removal of the Confederate flag from the South Carolina statehouse; shootings at a military recruiting center in Tennessee and a movie theater in Louisiana; the Boy Scouts’ decision to end its ban on gay adult leaders; the first images sent by the New Horizons spacecraft of Pluto; and the victory over Japan of the U.S. in the Women’s World Cup soccer finals.
No less traumatic and distracting were the preceding months’ newsworthy events, which included a shooting at a Charleston, S.C., church; the trial and sentencing of Boston Marathon bomber suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev; the U.S. Supreme Court’s affirmation of same-sex marriage, Obamacare, lethal injection drugs and government censorship of Confederate flag license plates; and an Amtrak train crash in Philadelphia that left more than 200 injured and eight dead.
Also included in the mix of distressing news coverage was the death of 25-year-old Freddie Gray while in police custody and the subsequent riots in Baltimore and city-wide lockdown; the damning report by the Dept. of Justice into discriminatory and abusive practices by the Ferguson police department; the ongoing saga of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email account while serving as secretary of state; the apparently deliberate crash by a copilot of a German jetliner in the French Alps, killing all 150 passengers and crew; the New England Patriots’ fourth Super Bowl win; ameasles outbreak in Disneyland; the escalating tensions between New York police and Mayor Bill de Blasio over his seeming support for anti-police protesters; and a terror attack at the Paris office of satire magazine Charlie Hebdo.
Rounding out the year’s worth of headline-worthy new stories were protests over grand jury refusals to charge police for the deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown; the disappearance of an AirAsia flight over the Java Sea; an Ebola outbreak that results in several victims being transported to the U.S. for treatment; reports of domestic violence among NFL players; a security breach at the White House in which a man managed to jump the fence, cross the lawn and enter the main residence; and the reported beheading of American journalist Steven Sotloff by ISIS.
That doesn’t even begin to touch on the spate of entertainment news that tends to win the battle for Americans’ attention: Bruce Jenner’s transgender transformation to Caitlyn Jenner; the death of Whitney Houston’s daughter Bobbi Kristina Brown; Kim Kardashian’s “break the internet” nude derriere photo; sexual assault allegations against Bill Cosby; the suicide of Robin Williams; the cancellation of the comedy The Interview in movie theaters after alleged terror hack threats; the wedding of George Clooney to Amal Alamuddin; the wedding of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt; the ALS ice bucket challenge; and the birth of a baby girl to Prince William and Kate.
As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, these sleight-of-hand distractions, diversions and news spectacles are how the corporate elite controls a population by entrapping them in the “crisis of the NOW,” either inadvertently or intentionally, advancing their agenda without much opposition from the citizenry.
Professor Jacques Ellul studied this phenomenon of overwhelming news, short memories and the use of propaganda to advance hidden agendas. “One thought drives away another; old facts are chased by new ones,” wrote Ellul.
“Under these conditions there can be no thought. And, in fact, modern man does not think about current problems; he feels them. He reacts, but he does not understand them any more than he takes responsibility for them. He is even less capable of spotting any inconsistency between successive facts; man’s capacity to forget is unlimited. This is one of the most important and useful points for the propagandists, who can always be sure that a particular propaganda theme, statement, or event will be forgotten within a few weeks.”
But what exactly has the government (aided and abetted by the mainstream media) been doing while we’ve been so cooperatively fixated on whatever current sensation happens to be monopolizing the so-called “news” shows?
If properly disclosed, consistently reported on and properly digested by the citizenry, the sheer volume of the government’s activities, which undermine the Constitution and in many instances are outright illegal, would inevitably give rise to a sea change in how business is conducted in our seats of power.
Surely Americans would be concerned about the Obama administration’s plans to use behavioral science tactics to “nudge” citizens to comply with the government’s public policy and program initiatives? There would be no end to the uproar if Americans understood the ramifications of the government’s plan to train non-medical personnel—teachers, counselors and other lay people—in “mental first aid” in order to train them to screen, identify and report individuals suspected of suffering from mental illness. The problem, of course, arises when these very same mental health screeners misdiagnose opinions or behavior involving lawful First Amendment activities as a mental illness, resulting in involuntary detentions in psychiatric wards for the unfortunate victims.
Parents would be livid if they had any inkling about the school-to-prison pipeline, namely, how the public schools are being transformed from institutions of learning to prison-like factories, complete with armed police and surveillance cameras, aimed at churning out compliant test-takers rather than independent-minded citizens. And once those same young people reach college, they will be indoctrinated into believing that they have a “right” to be free from acts and expressions of intolerance with which they might disagree.
Concerned citizens should be up in arms over the government’s end-run tactics to avoid abiding by the rule of law, whether by outsourcing illegal surveillance activities to defense contractors, outsourcing inhumane torture to foreign countries, causing American citizens to disappear into secret interrogation facilities, or establishing policies that would allow the military to indefinitely detain any citizen—including journalists—considered a belligerent or enemy.
And one would hope American citizens would be incensed about being treated like prisoners in an electronic concentration camp, their every movement monitored, tracked and recorded by a growing government surveillance network that runs the gamut from traffic cameras and police body cameras to facial recognition software. Or outraged that we will be forced to fund a $93 billion drone industry that will be used to spy on our movements and activities, not to mention the fact that private prisons are getting rich (on our taxpayer dollars) by locking up infants, toddlers, children and pregnant women?
Unfortunately, while 71% of American voters are “dissatisfied” with the way things are going in the United States, that discontent has yet to bring about any significant changes in the government, nor has it caused the citizenry to get any more involved in their government beyond the ritualistic election day vote.
Professor Morris Berman suggests that the problems plaguing us as a nation—particularly as they relate to the government—have less to do with our inattention to corruption than our sanctioning, tacit or not, of such activities. “It seems to me,” writes Berman, “that the people do get the government they deserve, and even beyond that, the government who they are, so to speak.”
In other words, if we end up with a militarized police state, it will largely be because we welcomed it with open arms. In fact, according to a recent poll, almost a third of Americans would support a military coup “to take control from a civilian government which is beginning to violate the constitution.”
So where does that leave us?
As legendary television journalist Edward R. Murrow warned, “Unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse, and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it, and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.”
September 29th, 2015 by olddog
By Paul Craig Roberts
Today is the 70th anniversary of the UN. It is not clear how much good the UN has done. Some UN Blue Hemet peacekeeping operations had limited success. But mainly Washington has used the UN for war, such as the Korean War and Washington’s Cold War against the Soviet Union. In our time Washington had UN tanks sent in against Bosnian Serbs during the period that Washington was dismantling Yugoslavia and Serbia and accusing Serbian leaders, who tried to defend the integrity of their country against Washington’s aggression, of “war crimes.”
The UN supported Washington’s sanctions against Iraq that resulted in the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children. When asked about it, Clinton’s Secretary of State said, with typical American heartlessness, that the deaths of the children were worth it. In 2006 the UN voted sanctions against Iran for exercising its right as a signatory of the non-proliferation treaty to develop atomic energy. Washington claimed without any evidence that Iran was building a nuclear weapon in violation of the non-proliferation treaty, and this lie was accepted by the UN. Washington’s false claim was repudiated by all 16 US intelligence agencies and by the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors on the ground in Iran, but in the face of the factual evidence the US government and its presstitute media pressed the claim to the point that Russia had to intervene and take the matter out of Washington’s warmonger hands. Russia’s intervention to prevent US military attacks on Iran and Syria resulted in the demonization of Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin. “Facts?!, Washington don’t need no stinkin’ facts! We got power!” Today at the UN Obama asserted America’s over-riding power many times: the strongest military in the world, the strongest economy in the world.
The UN has done nothing to stop Washington’s invasions and bombings, illegal under international law, of seven countries or Obama’s overthrow by coup of democratic governments in Honduras and Ukraine, with more in the works.
The UN does provide a forum for countries and populations within countries that are suffering oppression to post complaints—except, of course, for the Palestinians, who, despite the boundaries shown on maps and centuries of habitation by Palestinians, are not even recognized by the UN as a state.
On this 70th anniversary of the UN, I have spent much of the day listening to the various speeches. The most truthful ones were delivered by the presidents of Russia and Iran. The presidents of Russia and Iran refused to accept the Washington-serving reality or Matrix that Obama sought to impose on the world with his speech. Both presidents forcefully challenged the false reality that the propagandistic Western media and its government masters seek to create in order to continue to exercise their hegemony over everyone else.
What about China? China’s president left the fireworks to Putin, but set the stage for Putin by rejecting US claims of hegemony: “The future of the world must be shaped by all countries.” China’s president spoke in veiled terms against Western neoliberal economics and declared that “China’s vote in the UN will always belong to the developing countries.”
In the masterly way of Chinese diplomacy, the President of China spoke in a non-threatening, non-provocative way. His criticisms of the West were indirect. He gave a short speech and was much applauded.
Obama followed second to the President of Brazil, who used her opportunity for PR for Brazil, at least for the most part. Obama gave us the traditional Washington spiel:
The US has worked to prevent a third world war, to promote democracy by overthrowing governments with violence, to respect the dignity and equal worth of all peoples except for the Russians in Ukraine and Muslims in Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan.
Obama declared Washington’s purpose to “prevent bigger countries from imposing their will on smaller ones.” Imposing its will is what Washington has been doing throughout its history and especially under Obama’s regime.
All those refugees overrunning Europe? Washington has nothing to do with it. The refugees are the fault of Assad who drops bombs on people. When Assad drops bombs it oppresses people, but when Washington drops bombs it liberates them. Obama justified Washington’s violence as liberation from “dictators,” such as Assad in Syria, who garnered 80% of the vote in the last election, a vote of confidence that Obama never received and never will.
Obama said that it wasn’t Washington that violated Ukraine’s sovereignty with a coup that overthrew a democratically elected government. It was Russia, whose president invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimera and is trying to annex the other breakaway republics, Russian populations who object to the Russophobia of Washington’s puppet government in Ukraine.
Obama said with a straight face that sending 60 percent of the US fleet to bottle up China in the South China Sea was not an act of American aggression but the protection of the free flow of commerce. Obama implied that China was a threat to the free flow of commerce, but, of course, Washington’s real concern is that China is expanding its influence by expanding the free flow of commerce.
Obama denied that the US and Israel employ violence. This is what Russia and Syria do, asserted Obama with no evidence. Obama said that he had Libya attacked in order to “prevent a massacre,” but, of course, the NATO attack on Libya perpetrated a massacre, an ongoing one. But it was all Gaddafi’s fault. He was going to massacre his own people, so Washington did it for him.
Obama justified all of Washington’s violence against millions of peoples on the grounds that Washington is well-meaning and saving the world from dictators. Obama attempted to cover up Washington’s massive war crimes, crimes that have killed and displaced millions of peoples in seven countries, with feel good rhetoric about standing up to dictators.
Did the UN General Assembly buy it? Probably the only one present sufficiently stupid to buy it was the UK’s Cameron. The rest of Washington’s vassals went through the motion of supporting Obama’s propaganda, but there was no conviction in their voices.
Vladimir Putin would have none of it. He said that the UN works, if it works, by compromise and not by the imposition of one country’s will, but after the end of the Cold War “a single center of domination arose in the world”—the “exceptional” country. This country, Putin said, seeks its own course which is not one of compromise or attention to the interests of others.
In response to Obama’s speech that Russia and its ally Syria wear the black hats, Putin said in reference to Obama’s speech that “one should not manipulate words.”
Putin said that Washington repeats its mistakes by relying on violence which results in poverty and social destruction. He asked Obama: “Do you realize what you have done?”
Yes, Washington realizes it, but Washington will not admit it.
Putin said that “ambitious America accuses Russia of ambitions” while Washington’s ambitions run wild, and that the West cloaks its aggression as fighting terrorism while Washington finances and encourages terrorism.
The President of Iran said that terrorism was created by the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and by US support for the Zionist destruction of Palestine.
Obama’s speech made clear that Washington accepts no responsibility for the destruction of the lives and prospects of millions of Muslims. The refugees from Washington’s wars who are overflowing Europe are the fault of Assad, Obama declared.
Obama’s claim to represent “international norms” was an assertion of US hegemony, and was recognized as such by the General Assembly.
What the world is faced with is two rogue anti-democratic governments—the US and Israel—that believe that their “exceptionalism” makes them above the law. International norms mean Washington’s and Israel’s norms. Countries that do not comply with international norms are countries that do not comply with Washington and Israel’s dictates.
The presidents of Russia, China, and Iran did not accept Washington’s definition of “international norms.”
The lines are drawn. Unless the American people come to their senses and expel the Washington warmongers, war is our future.
The only thing exceptional about America is the amount of international ignorance of its people. Who the hell do we think we are to destroy other nations for not following the orders of our Banking Cartel owned government? American exceptionalism is a putrid self-centered excuse to profit from needless wars where innocent children and adult citizens are murdered, infrastructure is destroyed, and economies go belly up. Here we are, totally incapable of making our government do the will of the people, and we have the balls to claim we are exceptionally benevolent people. We deserve what is coming, in spades! The only thing that would make us exceptional is if we had the guts to throw the bums out! If you continue to vote for the officers of this illegal corporation, you are basically saying, I don’t want to learn how to be a free citizen, because I’m too damned lazy, and don’t give a crap about other people! LEARN OR BURN!
September 28th, 2015 by olddog
For OVER 20 years our Confederate Society has been ‘Connecting the Dots’ of History so you may understand what, how & why America & You
are in the predicament you find yourselves today.
This ‘Dot’, the Revised Immigration Act of 1965, was perhaps the MOST IMPORTANT as it was the last ‘Jewel’ in the Marxist CROWN!
Let me explain for the benefit of those listed above that may be hearing this for the first time:
- America in 1965 could be best described as ‘Virginal Fertile Ground’.
It had been made ripe for what was about to come and her ‘innocence’ was about to be stripped from her by the same Demagogues in Washington who had been anxiously planning & waiting for just such a time to FINALIZE the prepping they engineered that had been underway for over 100 years.
- Remember that there was NO Inter-Net back then & any long distance communication between the people in various sections of the country was essentially Non-Existent!
Long Distance Calling was a SEPARATE line item on the monthly phone bill & too expensive for most so many, like our families before us, relied totally on what Washington told us believing it to be ‘gospel’ and accepting the 3-Network’s as being the un-official ‘Truth Guardians’.
That was pretty much how America was in 1965 & prior.
- Little did anyone realize that WE were ALL sitting on a ‘Fertile Ground’ for Political Exploitation.
After all and as mentioned, we trusted our government emphatically NEVER once thinking they could or would take advantage of us much less lay the groundwork for Subversion thru Usurpation.
- And if anyone so suggested, they would have been proclaimed a subversive. This was the ‘Fertile Ground’ of which I speak.
- America was always the good guy so if & when Washington ever ‘Blew the Bugle’, we NEVER stopped to think twice.
- Thus, who could have known or remotely suspected that an ‘Industrial War Machine’ had been afoot for decades and hiding in the shadows and deep recesses of government when heretofore, every American Family (including mine) had Loved Ones that served in numerous Wars prior and always, as we were Reminded….for the ‘good of the nation’……but WHOSE NATION as we would soon discover?
- How could anyone truly ‘Connect the Dots’ when America was still America (up to that point) respective of ‘Identity & Culture’. Bad Guys in government? NEVER! A Total Impossibility! A War complex? Equally Impossible!
But wasn’t it President Eisenhower who warned us of such following WW II ?
But again, how could anyone ‘Connect any Dot’ when seemingly, NOTHING had changed in America.
- But things would change because Washington and the Industrial War Complex had other intentions.
- Years had elapsed since WW II & both Washington & the ‘Complex’ fully understood that NEVER again would Politics & War ever again be the same or present the Same Opportunity as those Global ‘Wars of Old’…. for either.
Korea did NOT produce the ‘Fruits’ either had hoped for so ‘Foreign Engagements’ had to be ‘re-purposed’ by the Oligarchs that the American People were Never aware of to that point.
Those People (as General Lee always called them), recognized that their future now lay in secular foreign engagements and although Ho Chi Minh in VietNam never posed any real threat to us, as it was reported, we would find ourselves engaged in the First of Many of these ‘Secular Wars’ throughout the world….BUT this one would last- DELIBERATELY– for 10 years as it allowed the Hegemony in Washington to begin the LAST STAGES OF A RECONSTRUCTION THAT HAD BEEN IN PLAY FOR 100 YEARS PRIOR but unbeknownst to the People whose Total TRUST “Those People” had enjoyed.
ALL this was part of a Greater endeavor that would allow “Those People” the ability to engage in, the
3rd & Last Leg of America’s RECONSTRUCTION that our Confederate Society calls, The Cultural Leg!
- The Civil Rights Movement during this time was NO accident. It coincided with the Start of the VietNam War.
- The Washington Oligarchy had been Envisioning and LONGING for just such a time that would allow for their hidden Politics, combined with Social un-rest’ and a War, that would ensue for 10 miserable years that would, in the end, combine to ALTER this Country forever more.
It was the Perfect Political Environment for the ‘PERFECT STORM’ that allowed “Those People” to change everything & without drawing any attention whatsoever to what They were doing.
After all, OUR attention was elsewhere, as in a 10 year Never-Ending War…had it NOT?
- We were being ALTERED in every manner never before imagined & it would not be realized for several decades afterwards.
- Wars have a way of doing things like this- keeping one’s eye ONLY on the ‘Shiny Object in the Room’ while the other ‘hand’, so to speak, hides the real dominion of what is really going on!
- In cases such as these there is little if any time for ‘Reflection’ and always, any voices of reason are always obscured & drowned out.
The so-called American ‘Civil War’ is the PRIMARY EXAMPLE of this in that we were in it before we knew it & left to live with the consequences, thanks to another, afterwards!
WAR makes CLOUDY the ability to FOCUS!
This in turn allows for the political scumbags to take full advantage of the un-suspecting, culminating always in a devious political tsunami of enormous proportion resulting in Negative consequences to all.
But when the ‘DUST’ eventually settles, little GOOD is realized but the outcomes are ever-lasting as we have learned.
And it ALWAYS leaves the same Politicians & their ‘Associates’ who concocted this Crap in a Stronger & more Powerful position than ever before.
So what does this have to do with the Revised Immigration Act of 1965 You ask?
Take a look see below and see how this ‘Dot’ was “Those Peoples” literal ‘Insurance Rider’ for their treachery:
What we would learn afterwards, as stated, it was Washington’s 3rd & Final Leg of Reconstruction– Their CULTURAL Leg!
- But in order to understand this, let us re-examine & ‘Connect the Dots’ between 1965, what came afterwards and what occurred PRIOR to as NOTED above:
- VietNam ends a FAILURE in 1975 but, WHO benefitted?
- We would learn how ruthless and rotten LBJ really was but, WHO benefitted?
- The Civil Rights Movement that LBJ advanced would quickly evaporate & become a Political Wing for the DemonCRAP Party and a Carnal Special Interest in the years to come but, WHO benefitted?
- The Era of Political Correctness would be UNLEASHED upon a War-Weary America in the mid-1970’s and would intertwine with the New Politics coming about & made possible thanks to the Skullduggery noted above that most heretofore had dismissed out of hand because they trusted “Those People”, resulting in a literal Washington Politburo- WHO benefitted?
- And what would also change & be created resulting from what LBJ did in the 1960’s- a National Education Department in the 1970’s but preceded by the creation of virtually EVERY Central-National government Department in existence today All of whom were created in the 1960’s- WHO will benefit?
- These ‘Departments’, as we would learn in the decades following, would become the ‘Fuel Depots’ for Entitlements, Dependency and the Basis for America’s Socialization- WHO benefitted?
But What has this to do with the Revised Immigration Act of 1965 you ask?
Haven’t You ‘Connected this ‘Dot’ Yet …. as it is staring You Right in the Face?
- This REVISED IMMIGRATION ACT, in addition to ALL of the above, changed the persuasion of Immigrants coming into this Country from European to 3rd World.
It would have social consequences, as we have discovered, impacting the entire Social Infrastructure of America from language to education and more.
LBJ, Ted Kennedy and their confidants understood this but this was part of their PLAN!
- Now do the ‘Social Arithmetic’ CONNECTING ALL of the events regarding the above and what do YOU come up with?
- A Culturally & Demographically Altered America.
- A Divisive country & nothing at all similar to that of the European migration (but the Left would have you believe there is NO difference) with Each of these New Cultures now having their own ‘representatives’ in government serving Their Special Needs and only their needs. WHO benefits– Washington or us?
- And what has all this combined to result in? Divisiveness & Polarization.- Again, WHO HAS BENEFITTED?
- And as for ALL those ‘Federal’ departments that NEVER existed before the early 1960’s….. what have they become- Behemoth extensions for the Washington Leviathan that RUNS, OPERATES AND CONTROLS EACH & paid for from an ever-increasing TAX RATE that is still NOT enough as an out of control & Growing Federal Debt demands MORE so their Socialized ‘Fuel Depots’ can maintain their ‘Cultural distinction’.
This in turn allows for Washington’s Private Central Bank- their Federal Reserve, to grow stronger- NATIONALLY & INTERNATIONALLY!- WHO benefits?
- And look at the Social Infrastructure of America prior to 1965 while most of us were engaged in a 10-year War & look at it today- WHO has benefitted?
- And WHO VOTES always for the DemonCRAPS to perpetuate what LBJ under his ‘Great American Society (Socialist) Program created in the 1960’s when we were ‘focused’ on that ‘Shiny Object in the Room’ called VietNam- WHO has LOST but WHO has gained?
- Truly, WHO HAS BENEFITTED & WHO HAS BEEN MADE MORE OBSCURE?
“Those People”, as General Lee called them, are the SAME ONES WHO DESTROYED Our Land when they Illegally Invaded Our Country- The Confederate States of America who are Now destroying what is left of your country- the United States of America and for the SAME reasons.
There is NO Difference.
The ONLY Difference is that We Confederates have always understood how the ‘Dots were Connected’ but most of y’all bought the Farm with their concocted BS and NEVER understood where they intended on taking YOU when they crossed the river and into Manassas long ago!
- The REVISED IMMIGRATION ACT of 1965 was the Last Leg in the RECONSTRUCTION of America preceded by their 1st Leg (Political, 1868) and their 2nd Leg (Economic, 1913 and the creation of their Central Bank known as the Federal Reserve).
WHO has benefitted?
All this has been on-going since Lincoln’s Civil War.
Are Y’all ‘getting’ it?
3-Stages of Deliberate Reconstruction & ALL INTERTWINDED with the Other & ALL UNLEASHED UPON US BY THE SAME 2-WINGS OF THEIR BIRD OF PREY KNOWN AS:
The RepubliCONS and the DemonCRAPS!
A Country that knows NOT of Its Origin is like a Ship without a Rudder- Sooner or Later It Will (NOT If) Destroy itself on the Reef of Stupidity.
WE MUST SEPARATE!
It is Our ONLY Hope for Survival.
‘Played like a Fiddle & Washington has always been the Riddle’
President, The Confederate Society of America
We Told You So!
September 26th, 2015 by olddog
By Michael Snyder
You would think that the simultaneous crashing of all of the largest stock markets around the world would be very big news. But so far the mainstream media in the United States is treating it like it isn’t really a big deal. Over the last sixty days, we have witnessed the most significant global stock market decline since the fall of 2008, and yet most people still seem to think that this is just a temporary “bump in the road” and that the bull market will soon resume. Hopefully they are right. When the Dow Jones Industrial Average plummeted 777 points on September 29th, 2008 everyone freaked out and rightly so. But a stock market crash doesn’t have to be limited to a single day. Since the peak of the market earlier this year, the Dow is down almost three times as much as that 777 point crash back in 2008. Over the last sixty days, we have seen the 8th largest single day stock market crash in U.S. history on a point basis and the 10th largest single day stock market crash in U.S. history on a point basis. You would think that this would be enough to wake people up, but most Americans still don’t seem very alarmed. And of course what has happened to U.S. stocks so far is quite mild compared to what has been going on in the rest of the world.
Right now, stock market wealth is being wiped out all over the planet, and none of the largest global economies have been exempt from this. The following is a summary of what we have seen in recent days…
#1 The United States – The Dow Jones Industrial Average is down more than 2000 points since the peak of the market. Last month we saw stocks decline by more than 500 points on consecutive trading days for the first time ever, and there has not been this much turmoil in U.S. markets since the fall of 2008.
#2 China – The Shanghai Composite Index has plummeted nearly 40 percent since hitting a peak earlier this year. The Chinese economy is steadily slowing down, and we just learned that China’s manufacturing index has hit a 78 month low.
#3 Japan – The Nikkei has experienced extremely violent moves recently, and it is now down more than 3000 points from the peak that was hit earlier in 2015. The Japanese economy and the Japanese financial system are both basket cases at this point, and it isn’t going to take much to push Japan into a full-blown financial collapse.
#4 Germany – Almost one-fourth of the value of German stocks has already been wiped out, and this crash threatens to get much worse. The Volkswagen emissions scandal is making headlines all over the globe, and don’t forget to watch for massive trouble at Germany’s biggest bank.
#5 The United Kingdom – British stocks are down about 16 percent from the peak of the market, and the UK economy is definitely on shaky ground.
#6 France – French stocks have declined nearly 18 percent, and it has become exceedingly apparent that France is on the exact same path that Greece has already gone down.
#7 Brazil – Brazil is the epicenter of the South American financial crisis of 2015. Stocks in Brazil have plunged more than 12,000 points since the peak, and the nation has already officially entered a new recession.
#8 Italy – Watch Italy. Italian stocks are already down 15 percent, and look for the Italian economy to make very big headlines in the months ahead.
#9 India – Stocks in India have now dropped close to 4000 points, and analysts are deeply concerned about this major exporting nation as global trade continues to contract.
#10 Russia – Even though the price of oil has crashed, Russia is actually doing better than almost everyone else on this list. Russian stocks have fallen by about 10 percent so far, and if the price of oil stays this low the Russian financial system will continue to suffer.
What we are witnessing now is the continuation of a cycle of financial downturns that has happened every seven years. The following is a summary of how this cycle has played out over the past 50 years…
- It started in 1966 with a 20 percent stock market crash.
- Seven years later, the market lost another 45 percent (1973-74).
- Seven years later was the beginning of the “hard recession” (1980).
- Seven years later was the Black Monday crash of 1987.
- Seven years later was the bond market crash of 1994.
- Seven years later was 9/11 and the 2001 tech bubble collapse.
- Seven years later was the 2008 global financial collapse.
- 2015: What’s next?
A lot of people were expecting something “big” to happen on September 14th and were disappointed when nothing happened.
But the truth is that it has never been about looking at any one particular day. Over the past sixty days we have seen absolutely extraordinary things happen all over the planet, and yet some people are not even paying attention because they did not meet their preconceived notions of how events should play out.
And this is just the beginning. We haven’t even gotten to the great derivatives crisis that is coming yet. All of these things are going to take time to fully unfold.
A lot of people that write about “economic collapse” talk about it like it will be some type of “event” that will happen on a day or a week and then we will recover.
Well, that is not what it is going to be like.
You need to be ready to endure a very, very long crisis. The suffering that is coming to this nation is beyond what most of us could even imagine.
Even now we are seeing early signs of it. For instance, the mayor of Los Angeles says that the growth of homelessness in his city has gotten so bad that it is now “an emergency”…
On Tuesday, Los Angeles officials announced the city’s homelessness problem has become an emergency, and proposed allotting $100 million to help shelter the city’s massive and growing indigent population.
LA Mayor Eric Garcetti also issued a directive on Monday evening for the city to free up $13 million to help house the estimated 26,000 people who are living on the city’s streets.
According to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, the number of encampments and people living in vehicles has increased by 85% over the last two years alone.
And in recent years we have seen poverty absolutely explode all over the nation. The “bread lines” of the Great Depression have been replaced with EBT cards, and there is a possibility that a government shutdown in October could “suspend or delay food stamp payments”…
A government shutdown Oct. 1 could immediately suspend or delay food stamp payments to some of the 46 million Americans who receive the food aid.
The Agriculture Department said Tuesday that it will stop providing benefits at the beginning of October if Congress does not pass legislation to keep government agencies open.
“If Congress does not act to avert a lapse in appropriations, then USDA will not have the funding necessary for SNAP benefits in October and will be forced to stop providing benefits within the first several days of October,” said Catherine Cochran, a spokeswoman for USDA. “Once that occurs, families won’t be able to use these benefits at grocery stores to buy the food their families need.”
In the U.S. alone, there are tens of millions of people that could not survive without the help of the federal government, and more people are falling out of the middle class every single day.
Our economy is already falling apart all around us, and now another great financial crisis has begun.
When will the “nothing is happening” crowd finally wake up?
Hopefully it will be before they are sitting out on the street begging for spare change to feed their family.
September 25th, 2015 by olddog
By Michael Gaddy
“A standing military force, with an overgrown executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defense against foreign danger have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.” ~James Madison (Emphasis added in all quotes)
“Soldiers were likely to consider themselves separate from the populace, to become more attached to their officers than their government, and to be conditioned to obey commands unthinkingly. The power of a standing army, [Samuel] Adams counseled, “should be watched with a jealous Eye” ~ Professor Christopher Hamner, George Mason University
“A standing army we shall have, also, to execute the execrable commands of tyranny; and how are you to punish them? Will you order them to be punished? Who shall obey these orders? Will the oppressor let go the oppressed? Was there even an instance? Can the annals of mankind exhibit one single example where rulers overcharged with power willingly let go the oppressed, though solicited and requested most earnestly? In this scheme of energetic government, the people will find two sets of tax-gatherers, the state and the federal sheriffs. This, it seems to me, will produce such dreadful oppression as the people cannot possibly bear. The federal sheriff may commit what oppression, make what distresses, he pleases, and ruin you with impunity; for how are you to tie his hands? Have you any sufficiently decided means of preventing him from sucking your blood by speculations, commissions, and fees?” ~Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratification Convention, June 5, 1788.
I must confess to an inability to understand so many in this country who refer to themselves as “constitutionalists” yet support and avidly defend those who fail or outright refuse to honor their sacred oaths to our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Would these same people condemn the leaders of organized crime, yet support the enforcers and hit men and refer to them as “heroes” and “public servants” deserving of praise, support and adoration?
This was once a country with a government which has morphed into a government with a country. This obliterates any idea of a government operating with consent of the governed; the people now can only operate with the consent of the government. The whole darn thing is backwards. And who enforces the edicts of this government when the “governed” question that authority? This government has their paid hitmen and enforcers just like the mafia. And for some unknown reason, the sheeple (the governed) feel the need to worship and honor these enforcers and hitmen.
The Declaration of Independence tells us the primary purpose of government is to protect and defend the Creator endowed rights of the individual. How many cops do you think would be needed if all they did was protect our rights as provided in the Bill of Rights? Would they need assault weapons, SWAT teams and MRAPs?
The 4th Amendment to our Constitution has been eviscerated in order to accommodate the “war on drugs,” a totally unconstitutional war if there ever was one. For the doubting Thomas’s among my readers, answer for me please the following question. If, in 1919, it was necessary to amend the Constitution in order to prohibit alcohol sale, distribution and consumption, why was it not necessary to amend the Constitution in order to prohibit the sale, distribution and consumption of drugs? The Constitution has not changed, but the people have, they willingly accept tyranny for “emotional reasons” and honor those who steal their individual rights and liberty as long as that tyranny is directed at another group of people—or another race of people.
The government’s various wars on poverty, drugs and terror have destroyed our God given rights enumerated in our Bill of Rights while making criminals, politicians (is there a difference) and our standing army quite wealthy, all the while robbing the people of their hard earned tax dollars.
Although the government wars have been going on for most of my life, the things our government declares war on somehow manages to increase exponentially. Today we have more poverty, more drugs and more terrorists than we had when the various wars on these objects began. Just think, if we had all the money spent on these wars, we would not have a national debt, we would have a surplus as large or larger than our national debt is today.
How does this make sense to anyone with an IQ higher than the average temperature of Colorado at 7000 ft. in October? If you hired a private contractor to rid your home and property of vermin, would you continue to pay them more and more money each year if the vermin increased exponentially after each effort of the contractor? Didn’t think so! Then why do you continue to support the same type of results from government?
It is my contention that between 90-95 percent of all laws passed by various legislatures—and all regulations which are enforced as laws—are unconstitutional. Why then should we pay for more and more police and “federal sheriffs” to enforce those laws; laws which destroy our individual rights? Why too do we not only tolerate, but continue to elect people to “law enforcement” positions who claim it is not their job to determine if a law is constitutional, but will continue to enforce them until some other elected or appointed government employee says otherwise. Did we not stand as an authority which executed over 1000 Germans and Japanese for simply “following orders” without questioning them after WWII? What is the difference between the Nazi SS officer or the Japanese soldier on the Bataan Death March and the “law enforcement” officer who blindly enforces unconstitutional laws in this country? Are they not both just following orders?
Did the 74 men, women and children at Waco in 1993, die any less horribly than those who died in the concentration camps of Europe or the Philippines? What about 14 year old Samuel Weaver or his mother Vicki, or the 7 bikers that died in Waco last May from gunshot wounds to the head with the shots traveling in a downward direction; kind of hard to produce in an alleged wild gunfight in a parking lot.
Speaking of guns and firearms produces another troubling question in my mind. What is it with the Second Amendment crowd and their rabid support for government “law enforcement” personnel? Who were those people going from door to door in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina back in 05?
Although I have very little confidence in the NRA, they at least produced a good video on this event. Watch this video and then ask yourself: would any of the folks in this video have said “it can’t happen here” two weeks before it did? Of the thousands of guns confiscated, only the cheap ones were ever returned. Police officers stated during depositions “most of the quality guns” were kept by the officers who confiscated them and were never returned. Yet, not one of these officers was punished for their crimes.
We would not need the NRA or any other gun advocacy group if the people who collect a regular paycheck and wear a uniform and a badge protected our rights instead of following government orders without a thought as to their constitutionality, and then committing felony theft by keeping the guns they illegally confiscated.
The majority of our founders were terribly concerned about a “standing army” which included “federal sheriffs.” It is impossible to refute the position that such a standing army is now active in this country and includes the police; local, state and federal. If you believe for a second those who wear a badge will refuse orders to confiscate your firearms or refuse to enforce a myriad of unconstitutional laws, perhaps you too will someday be in a Youtube video explaining why you no longer believe or support the army of occupation in our country known as the police—if you survive the encounter.
In Rightful Liberty
Disregarding the fact that public school Teachers value their pay-checks more than teaching the children to understand their natural rights, why do the people of America not have the common sense to figure out all Mike’s complaints without being Constitutional scholars? Are Americans so stupid they believe we must give up our rights just because some traitorous politician did not know his ass from a hole in the ground? Why would any intelligent person think politicians must be obeyed no matter what? As for me, I have enough common sense to direct my life without their stupid laws.
I Am Mourning For America
By Michael Snyder
I am mourning for America, because she is dying. I am mourning for a nation that once knew such greatness but that has now fallen to depths that were once unimaginable. I am mourning for the death and destruction that are coming, and I am mourning for a future that our children and our grandchildren will never get to see. I am mourning for a nation that has refused to listen to the warnings and that now stands on the precipice of judgment. I am mourning for games that will never be played, for books that will never be finished, for family vacations that will never get to happen and for memories that will never be made. I am mourning for the economic depression that is coming, for the horror and suffering that friends and family will endure, and for the coming death of the country where I drew my first breath.
To many, these words will seem “over the top” and overly dramatic. After all, despite the thousands of problems facing this nation, things still seem very “normal” at this moment. Well, if you don’t “get” what I am saying right now, just bookmark this page and come back to it later. Eventually it will make sense to you.
Last week, I was invited to be a guest on a major television show that is beamed into the homes of millions of people in the United States and Canada. If you get a chance to view the shows that are being aired this week, you will notice that I wore all black.
I wasn’t just making a fashion statement. I was doing it because I am in mourning for America. Unlike so many that talk about the horrible things that are ahead for this country, I actually love the United States. I truly wish that this nation had become everything that it could have become. I love the part of the country where I currently live, I love the amazing people that I am constantly meeting, and I love the things that I have been able to experience just because I am an American.
Unfortunately, everything is about to change.
There are many out there that believe that America is still a great nation. Well, great nations do not murder tens of millions of their own children. As Dr. Chuck Missler has pointed out, the most dangerous place to be in America today is in a mother’s womb.
Since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, more than 56 million babies have been purposely destroyed in this country.
What does a nation that has murdered 56 million of its own children deserve?
I believe that we have just come out of a season of time when America has been shown exactly why it is about to be judged.
It is no accident that the undercover Planned Parenthood videos were released when they were. Now the entire world knows that we slaughter our babies, harvest their organs and sell them off to the highest bidder.
So what has the response of the American people been to the revelation of this great evil?
Yes, a small minority of Americans have gotten upset, but most people have been completely unmoved by this news.
Our government gives Planned Parenthood hundreds of millions of dollars each year, and that isn’t going to change. Planned Parenthood is just going to keep doing what they do, and the American people are just going to go back to ignoring the unprecedented holocaust that is happening behind closed doors all over the nation.
This past summer we also witnessed what I believe is the perfect bookend for the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision of 1973. The institution of marriage was permanently altered in all 50 states, and most of the nation greatly rejoiced.
The White House was lit up with rainbow colors to honor what the Supreme Court did. The rainbow is a symbol of God’s covenant with Noah, and in the book of Revelation there is a rainbow around the throne of God. They have taken this symbol that belongs to God, and they are using it as a symbol of their defiance.
Of course these things that I have just mentioned are just the tip of the iceberg. The truth is that evil is growing in this nation in thousands of different ways. Every year there are 20 million new cases of sexually transmitted disease in the United States, we have the highest divorce rate in the entire industrialized world, and nearly one out of every five American women say that they have been raped at some point in their lives. In the United States today, there are 60 million people that abuse alcohol and there are 22 million people that use illegal drugs. America produces more pornography than the rest of the world combined, and surveys have found that Christian men use it at just about the same rate as everyone else.
I will not be publishing an article tomorrow. In a few hours, Yom Kippur will begin where I live. It is the most solemn of all the holidays described in the Bible, and it is a time of repentance. I will be praying for myself, my family, my community and my nation.
If America had repented as a nation and had turned from her wicked ways, we would not have to go through the things that we are about to go through.
I believe that the time of grace that the United States has been given to repent is ending.
I know that this is very different from my usual format. Is it okay if I just share what is on my heart from time to time? On Thursday I will get back to sharing the facts, figures and hard information that you all have come to expect from me. But today when I woke up I just felt that I should share these things with you.
Very shortly, things are going to start changing in a major way.
America is dying, and the hardest times that any of us have ever seen are right in front of us.
September 24th, 2015 by olddog
By Brandon Smith
Throughout history, in most cases of economic collapse the societies in question believed they were financially invincible just before their disastrous fall. Rarely does anyone see the edge of the cliff or even the bottom of the abyss before it has swallowed a nation whole. This lack of foresight, however, is not entirely the fault of the public. It is, rather, a consequence caused by the manipulation of the fundamental information available to the public by governments and social gatekeepers.
In the years leading up to the Great Depression, numerous mainstream “experts” and politicians were quick to discount the idea of economic collapse, and most people were more than ready to believe them. Equities markets were, of course, the primary tool used to falsely elicit popular optimism. When markets rose, even in spite of other very negative fiscal indicators, the masses were satisfied. In this way, stock markets have become a kind of dopamine switch financial elites can push at any given time to juice the citizenry and distract them from the greater perils of their economic future. During every upswing of stocks, the elites argued that the “corner had been turned,” when in reality the crisis had just begun. Nothing has changed since the crash of 1929. Just look at some of these quotes and decide if the rhetoric sounds familiar today:
John Maynard Keynes in 1927: “We will not have any more crashes in our time.”
H.H. Simmons, president of the New York Stock Exchange, Jan. 12, 1928: “I cannot help but raise a dissenting voice to statements that we are living in a fool’s paradise, and that prosperity in this country must necessarily diminish and recede in the near future.”
Irving Fisher, leading U.S. economist, The New York Times, Sept. 5, 1929: “There may be a recession in stock prices, but not anything in the nature of a crash.” And on 17, 1929:“Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau. I do not feel there will be soon if ever a 50 or 60 point break from present levels, such as (bears) have predicted. I expect to see the stock market a good deal higher within a few months.”
- McNeel, market analyst, as quoted in the New York Herald Tribune, Oct. 30, 1929: “This is the time to buy stocks. This is the time to recall the words of the late J. P. Morgan… that any man who is bearish on America will go broke. Within a few days there is likely to be a bear panic rather than a bull panic. Many of the low prices as a result of this hysterical selling are not likely to be reached again in many years.”
Harvard Economic Society, Nov. 10, 1929: “… a serious depression seems improbable; [we expect] recovery of business next spring, with further improvement in the fall.”
I hear nearly identical statements from pro-mainstream, pro-dollar skeptics all the time. And all of their assertions rest solely on the illusion of the Dow and the dollar index, not to mention statistics that are sourced from the very government that has much to gain by fooling the public into believing all is well.
In 2009, Paul Krugman, perhaps the worst and most famous economist of our age, lamented on the fact that no one in mainstream finance saw the derivatives and credit crash coming. Yet it is the same kinds of manipulative policies that Krugman champions that caused this collective ignorance in mainstream circles to begin with.
What the past proves, time and time again, is that establishment trained and educated economists are perhaps the most useless of all analysts. They are perpetually wrong. Only independent analysts have ever been able to predict anything of value as far as our economic future — not because they are psychic, but because they have the advantage of standing outside the foggy propaganda of brainwashed financial academia.
It also proves that the appearance of prosperity means nothing if the fundamentals do not support the optimism. That is to say, a bullish stock market, a high dollar index and a low unemployment percentage mean nothing if such stats are generated by false methods and fiat. The fundamentals ALWAYS matter. As we saw during the Great Depression, the markets cannot hide from reality forever.
I relate these points because the future I am about to suggest here might sound outlandish to some, because it is so contrary to the “official” accounting of our current financial world. It is important to remember that the mainstream, the majority, is almost always wrong and that the truth is very rarely accepted broadly until calamity has already fallen.
I outlined the hard facts behind the reality of economic downturn in my article “We Have Just Witnessed The Last Gasp Of The Global Economy.”
The bottom line is that the stock market, the greatest false indicator of all time, is on the verge of implosion; and the banking elites are positioning themselves to avoid blame for this implosion while the rest of us are being sold on the most elaborate recovery con-game ever conceived. But what is the purpose behind this con-game? Lies are generally only told by those who hope to gain something through deception. What do the elites hope to gain by creating a facade of recovery?
They have openly admitted to the public on numerous occasions EXACTLY what they want — namely, the institution of a truly global and centralized economic system revolving around a highly controlled world currency framework and dominated by a select cult of banking oligarchs. Anyone who claims that this is not the goal is either a liar or an uneducated fool.
I have covered the evidence supporting this program many times in the past, but it would seem with the precariously surreal nature of our world today that much needs repeating. In 1988, the financial magazine ‘The Economist’ published an article titled “Get ready for a world currency by 2018,” in which it outlined the framework for a global currency system called the “Phoenix” (a hypothetical title), administered by the International Monetary Fund by the year 2018, which would erase all national economic sovereignty and require governments to borrow from the world central banking authority, rather than print, in order to finance their infrastructure programs. This would mean total control by the IMF over member nations as they beg and plead for more capital under the global currency umbrella.
September 22nd, 2015 by olddog
By Philippe Gastonne
It’s Corporate Governance 101: Company directors are supposed to respect the wishes of the shareholders they are duty bound to serve. And if the directors defy them, those shareholders are supposed to hold the directors accountable.
That principle of board accountability will face an unusually stark test on Sept. 22, when Bank of America shareholders gather at company headquarters in Charlotte, N.C., for a special meeting — and a significant vote.
The question before the shareholders seems innocuous: It asks them to allow the directors a free hand in setting board structure. But some investors see the question as a slap in the face. Here’s why: At the bank’s 2009 annual meeting, shareholders passed a bylaw requiring that the board be overseen by an independent “chairman.” The bylaw passed by a whisker, but it was nonetheless binding.
Last fall, however, the board abruptly overturned the bylaw when it elected Brian T. Moynihan, the bank’s chief executive, its chairman as well. A vote for the motion on Sept. 22 would essentially enshrine that decision.
Therefore, the vote on Tuesday is only a little bit about the value of separating the chairman and chief executive roles at Bank of America. It is a lot more about reminding the bank’s directors not to treat shareholders with contempt. – New York Times, Sept. 18, 2015
We all know that the various forms of democratic governance don’t work nearly as well as advertised. Representatives usually turn corrupt in short order, no matter how the people select them. They devolve into oligarchy under a democratic façade.
The same is true when corporations pretend to operate under democratic principles. The charters give shareholders a patina of respect, and then management assembles an underworked, overpaid board that will rubber-stamp anything to keep its comfortable role secure.
Occasionally management miscalculates, waking up shareholders to emit sheep-like bleats of protest. One such protest is happening today at Bank of America. Dissident shareholders want the board led by an independent chairperson, instead of having CEO Brian Moynihan wear both hats.
The vote will likely fail because money managers control votes for a huge bloc of shares, even though the shares nominally belong to their underlying investors. The money managers are as “independent” of management as the bank’s toadlike board members are.
In theory, the money managers are fiduciaries who should place their clients’ interests ahead of their own. In practice, they do no such thing. Fidelity, Blackrock, Vanguard and other large mutual fund sponsors all have other business relationships with Bank of America. They will not place those revenues at risk as long as they can plausibly claim their intentions are pure.
This means the Moynihan regime will retain control, and can continue plundering and looting Bank of America for its own enrichment. As far as they are concerned, any offended shareholders should just sell their shares and leave.
Congress has a similar method. It groups us together in gerrymandered districts such that any resistance is futile, and then plunders our wallets to fill its own. If we don’t like it, we can just vote for somebody else… who will do the same again.
When will the people wake up and all agree to adhere to time tested rules of commerce and personal behavior? We would not need all of these professional scavengers to drain our pockets, if we assume responsibility for our own lives. It’s not that complicated folks. Anarchy could be the savior of societies. You are already doing it with the hundreds of personal recognition groups you form and participate in.
September 21st, 2015 by olddog
DAVIDE BONAZZI FOR THE BOSTON GLOBE
By Stephen Kinzer SEPTEMBER 20, 2015
REAL ENEMIES ARE a threat to any country, but imagined enemies can be even more dangerous. They sap resources, provoke needless conflicts, and divert attention from true challenges. The United States has constructed such a fantasy by turning Russia into an enemy.
Our current campaign against Russia was set off by what some in Washington call its “aggression” against neighboring Ukraine. Russia’s decision to aid the Assad regime in Syria has also angered us. The true reasons for anti-Russia sentiment, though, lie deeper.
Most leading figures in the American political and security establishments grew up during the Cold War. They spent much of their lives believing that the Antichrist lived in Moscow. Today they speak as if the Cold War never ended.
For a brief period in the 1990s, it appeared that Russia had lost control over its own security. Stunned into paralysis by the collapse of the Soviet Union, and without any power to resist, Russians had to watch helplessly as NATO, their longtime enemy, established bases directly on their borders. Many in Washington believed that the United States had permanently broken Russian power. In their jubilation, they imagined that we would be able to keep our foot on Russia’s neck forever.
That was highly unrealistic. By pressing our advantage too strongly in the years after the Cold War, we guaranteed a nationalist reaction. President Vladimir Putin embodies it. He is popular in Russia because his people believe he is trying to claw back some of Russia’s lost power. For the same reason, he is demonized in Washington.
Having Russia as an enemy is strangely comforting to Americans. It reassures us that the world has not really changed. That means we do not have to change our policies. Our back-to-the-future hostility toward Russia allows us to pull out our dusty Cold War playbook. We have resurrected not just that era’s anti-Moscow policies but also the hostile rhetoric that accompanied them.
This summer’s most extreme exaggeration of Russia’s power came not from an inveterate Cold Warrior like John McCain or Hillary Clinton, but from the new chairman of our Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford. At his Senate confirmation hearing in July, Dunford said Russia “could pose an existential threat to the United States.” He suggested that, to defend ourselves, we should send aid to Ukrainians who want to fight Russia.
Statements like these are bizarre on several levels. First, Russia is a fundamentally weak country with a tottering economy. It is far from being able to compete with the United States, much less threaten it. Second, Russia is surrounded by American military bases, hears threats from the West every day, faces NATO guns on its borders, and therefore has reason to fear for its security. Third, by pushing Russia away, we are driving it toward China, thereby encouraging a partnership that could develop into a true threat to American power.
The most important reason it is folly to turn Russia into an enemy is more far-reaching than any of these. Europe remains stable only when all of its major countries are included in the process of governing, and each one’s security concerns are taken seriously.
The visionary Prince Metternich grasped this truth 200 years ago. Metternich was foreign minister of the Austrian Empire and mastermind of the Congress of Vienna, which was charged with reconstructing Europe after nearly a quarter-century of war. France was the villain. French armies under Napoleon had ravaged much of Europe. Anti-French sentiment was widespread and virulent. Delegates to the Congress of Vienna demanded harsh punishment for the troublemaker. Metternich resisted their pressure. He persuaded other leaders that in the interest of future stability, they must invite the miscreant back into the family. That kept Europe at peace for generations.
Emotion argues that Russia is a troublemaker because it refuses to play by our rules, and must be confronted and punished. Reason should reply that Russia is a legitimate power, cannot be expected to take orders from the West, and will not stand quietly while the United States promotes anti-Russia movements on its borders.
In our current standoff, Russia has at least one advantage: Its leaders are not foolish enough to consider the United States an existential threat. We would benefit from a bit of their realism.
Stephen Kinzer is a visiting fellow at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University. Follow him on Twitter@stephenkinzer.
September 19th, 2015 by olddog
By Richard Ebeling
For over a decade, now, the American economy has been on an economic rollercoaster, of an economic boom between 2003 and 2008, followed by a severe economic downturn, and with a historically slow and weak recovery starting in 2009 up to the present.
Before the dramatic stock market decline of 2008-2009, many were the political and media pundits who were sure that the “good times” could continue indefinitely, including some members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, America’s central bank.
When the economic downturn began and then worsened, many were the critics who were sure that this proved the “failure” of capitalism in bringing such financial and real economic disruption to America and the world.
There were resurrected long questioned or rejected theories from theGreat Depression years of the 1930s that argued that only far-sighted and wise government interventions and regulations could save the country from economic catastrophe and guarantee we never suffer from a similar calamity in the future.
The Boom-Bust Cycle Has Its Origin in Government Policy
Not only is the capitalist system not responsible for the latest economic crisis, but all attempts to severely hamstring or regulate the market economy out of existence only succeed in undermining the greatest engine of economic progress and prosperity known to mankind.
The recession of 2008-2009 had its origin in years of monetary mismanagement by the Federal Reserve System and misguided economic policies emanating from Washington, D.C. For the five years between 2003 and 2008, the Federal Reserve flooded the financial markets with a huge amount of money, increasing it by 50 percent or more by some measures.
For most of those years, key market rates of interest, when adjusted for inflation, were either zero or even negative. The banking system was awash in money to lend to all types of borrowers. To attract people to take out loans, these banks not only lowered interest rates (and therefore the cost of borrowing); they also lowered their standards for credit worthiness.
To get the money, somehow, out the door, financial institutions found “creative” ways to bundle together mortgage loans into tradable packages that they could then pass on to other investors. It seemed to minimize the risk from issuing all those sub-prime home loans, which we viewed afterwards as the housing market’s version of high-risk junk bonds. The fears were soothed by the fact that housing prices kept climbing as home buyers pushed them higher and higher with all of that newly created Federal Reserve money.
At the same time, government-created home-insurance agencies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were guaranteeing a growing number of these wobbly mortgages, with the assurance that the “full faith and credit” of Uncle Sam stood behind them. By the time the Federal government formally took over complete control of Fannie and Freddie in 2008, they were holding the guarantees for half of the $10 trillion American housing market.
Easy Money and Lower Interest Rates Led to the Bust
Low interest rates and reduced credit standards were also feeding a huge consumer-spending boom that that resulted in a 25 percent increase in consumer debt between 2003 and 2008, from $2 trillion to over $2.5 trillion. With interest rates so low, there was little incentive to save for tomorrow and big incentives to borrow and consume today. But, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, during that five-year period average real income only increased by at the most 2 percent. Peoples’ debt burdens, therefore, rose dramatically.
The easy money and government-guaranteed house of cards all started to come tumbling down in 2008, with a huge crash in the stock market that brought some indexes down 30 to 50 percent from their highs. The same people in Washington who produced this disaster then said that what was needed was more regulation to repair the very financial and housing markets their earlier actions had so severely undermined.
That included, at the time, a shotgun wedding between the U.S. government and the largest banks in America, when in October of 2008, the heads of those financial institutions were commanded to come to Washington, D.C. for a meeting with, then, Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson and former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.
They were told the federal government was injecting cash into the banking system with a purchase of $245 billion of shares of bank stocks in the financial sector. The banking CEOs present – some of whom made it clear they neither needed nor wanted an infusion of government money – were basically told they would not be allowed to leave the Treasury building until they had signed on the dotted line. (The money was eventually returned to the Treasury, with bank buybacks of the shares in which the government had “invested.”)
Opening the Monetary Spigot Again
The Federal Reserve, in the meantime, turned on the monetary spigot, increasing monetary base (cash and bank reserves) between 2007 and 2015 from $740 billion to around $4 trillion, brought about through a series of monetary creation policies under the general heading of “quantitative easing.”
A variety of key interest rates, as a consequence, have, when adjusted for inflation, been in the negative range most of the time for seven years. Nominal and real interest rates, therefore, cannot be considered to be telling anything truthful about the actual availability of savings in the economy and its relationship to market-based profitability of potential investments.
Interest rates manipulation has worked similarly to a price control keeping the price of a good below its market-determined and clearing level. It has undermined the motives and abilities of some people to save on the supply-side, while distorting demand-side decision-making in terms of both the types and time-horizons of possible investments to undertake, since the real scarcity and cost of borrowing for capital formation has been impossible to realistically estimate and judge in a financial market without market-based interest rates.
Markets have been distorted, investment patterns have been given wrong and excessive directions and labor and resources have been misdirected into various employments that will eventually be shown to be unsustainable.
Low Inflation and Faulty Price Indexes
Keynesians and other supporters of “stimulus” policies have argued that there has been no need to fear “excesses” in the economy because price inflation has been tame – running less than two percent a year practically the entire time since 2008.
First, it needs to be remembered that this measurement of price inflation is based upon one or another type of statistical price index. This by necessity hides from view all the individual price changes that make up the statistical average, and which has seen in the last few years significant price increases in subsectors of the market.
Second, the full impact of the massive monetary expansion has been prevented from having its full effect due to a policy gimmick that the Federal Reserve has been following since virtually the start of its quantitative easing policies. The central bank has been paying banks a rate of interest slightly above the interest rate it could earn from lending to borrowers in the private sector.
Thus, it has been more profitable for many banks to leave large amounts of their available reserves unlent as “excess reserves” that have been totaling almost $2.8 trillion of the nearly $4 trillion that Federal Reserve created. Having created all this additional lending potential, the Fed has been manipulating interest rates, again, this time to keep a large amount of it from coming on the market.
Third, particularly since 2014, the world has been increasingly awash in expanding oil supplies that has resulted in dramatically lower prices for refined oil products of all types, and most visibly to the average consumer in the form of falling prices to fill up one’s car with gasoline.
Greater supplies of useful and widely used raw materials and resources at significantly lower cost should be considered a boon to all in the economy, in making production and finished goods less expensive, and thereby raising the standards of living of all demanding such products.
Instead, the Federal Reserve worries about “price deflation” as a drag on the economy, rather than as a market-based stimulus through supply-side plentifulness that, in the long run, reduces the scarcity and cost of desired goods and services.
Central banks around the world have all gravitated to the idea that the “ideal” rate of price inflation that assures economic stability and sustainability is around two percent per year. Fixated on averages and aggregates, the central bankers continue to give little or no attention to the really important influence their monetary policies have on economic affairs: the distortion of the structures of relative prices, profit margins, resource uses and capital investments.
The “Austrian” Theory of Money and the Business Cycle
In my new book, Monetary Central Planning and the State, which will be published in October 2015 by the Future of Freedom Foundation in a eBook format available from Amazon, I explain the “Austrian” theory of money and the business cycle in contrast to bothKeynesian Economics and Monetarism.
Developed especially by Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich A. Hayek in the 20th century, the Austrian theory uniquely demonstrates the process by which central bank-initiated monetary expansion and interest rate manipulation invariably sets the stage for both an artificial boom and an eventual, inescapable bust.
Their theory is explained in the context of an analysis of the most severe economic downturn of the last one hundred years, the Great Depression. The crash of 1929 and the depression that followed were the outcome of Federal Reserve monetary policy in the 1920s, when the goal was price level stabilization – neither price inflation nor price deflation. But beneath the apparent stability of the statistical price level, monetary expansion and below-market rates of interest generated a mismatch between savings and investment in the American economy that finally broke in 1929 and 1930.
But the depth and duration of the Great Depression through the greater part of the 1930s was also not due to anything inherent in the market economy. Rather than allow markets to find their new, post-boom market-clearing levels in terms of prices, wages and resource reallocations, governments in America and Europe undertook a wide variety of massive economic interventions.
The outcome was rising and prolonged unemployment, idle factories, unused capital and vast amounts of economic waste caused by wage and price interventions, large government budget deficits and accompanying accumulated debt, uneconomic public works projects, barriers to international trade due to economic nationalism and protectionism and introduction of forms of government planning and control over people’s lives and market activities.
Faulty and Misguided Keynesian Ideas
Many of these rationales for “activist” monetary and fiscal policy emerged and took form under the cover of the emerging Keynesian Revolution as first presented by British economist John Maynard Keynes. In Monetary Central Planning and the State, I also offer a detailed critique of the fundamental premises of the Keynesian approach and why its policy prescriptions in fact lead to the very boom-bust cycle the Keynesians claim to want to prevent.
Furthermore, it is shown why it is that every essential building block of the Keynesian edifice is based on faulty economic premises, superficial conceptions of how markets actually function and why its end result is more government control with none of the benefit of economic stability that the Keynesians say is their goal.
Also, in spite of Milton Friedman‘s valuable contributions to an understanding of the superiority of competitive markets in general, his own version of activist monetary policy through a “rule” of monetary expansion and “automatic” fiscal stabilizers was more an “immanent criticism” within the Keynesian macroeconomic framework, rather than a fundamental alternative such as the “Austrian” economists have offered.
Private Free Banking, Not Central Banking
What, then, is to be done, in terms of the workings and the institutions of the monetary system? A good part of Monetary Central Planning and the State is devoted to explaining the inherent economic weaknesses and political shortcomings of all forms of central banking.
In a nutshell, central banking suffers from many of the same problems as all other forms of central planning – the presumption that monetary central planners can ever successfully manage the monetary and banking system better than a truly competitive private banking system operating on the basis of market-chosen forms of money and media of exchange.
It is shown how systems of private competitive banking could function if government central banking were brought to an end. This is done through a critical analysis of the proposals for a private monetary and banking system as found in the writings of Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich A. Hayek, Murray N. Rothbard and the “modern” proponents of monetary freedom: Lawrence H. White, George Selgin, and Kevin Dowd.
Monetary Central Planning and the State ends with a brief list of the steps that could and should be taken to begin the successful transition from central banking to a free-market monetary and banking system of the future.
If the last one hundred years has shown and demonstrated anything, it is that governments – even when in the hands of the well intentioned – have neither the knowledge, wisdom nor ability to manage the social and economic affairs of multitudes of hundreds of millions, and now billions, of people around the world. The end result has always been loss of liberty and economic misdirection and distortion.
It Is the Time for Monetary Freedom
A hundred years of central banking in the United States since the establishment of the Federal Reserve System in 1913 has equally demonstrated the inability of monetary central planners to successfully direct the financial and banking affairs of the nation through the tools of monopoly control over the quantity of money and the resulting powerful influence on money’s value and the interest rates at which savers and borrowers interact.
It is time for a radical denationalization of money, a privatization of the monetary and banking system through a separation of government from money and all forms of financial intermediation.
That is the pathway to ending the cycles of booms and busts, and creating the market-based institutional framework for sustainable economic growth and betterment.
It is time for monetary freedom to replace the out-of-date belief in government monetary central planning.
Dr. Richard Ebeling is the BB&T Distinguished Professor of Ethics and Free Enterprise Leadership at The Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina. He was professor of economics at Northwood University in Midland, Michigan (2009-2014). He served as president of the Foundation for Economic Education (2003-2008) and held the Ludwig von Mises Chair in Economics at Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan (1988-2003). His new book, Monetary Central Planning and the State, to be published in October 2015 by the Future of Freedom in eBook format will be available from Amazon.
It seems odd to me that human beings ever trusted a government to do anything right when the history of governments so furiously Denys it.
September 18th, 2015 by olddog
Anna von Reitz
This is an absolutely brilliant expose and beginning of the rabbit trail with regard to the “federal” corporate government and the mechanisms by which it gets its tentacles attached to us via “registration” processes, etc., I am sure that there is a lot more to be ferreted out since the last time I did it in 1999.
God bless and good speed.
That said I have to remind you all of the following directly experienced facts: (1) There is no remedy available to us via the existing court system; (2) We have been press-ganged into their foreign jurisdiction and have to take appropriate action to reverse their claim to own our estate (and us) before we can safely operate in their system of international commerce; (3) there is no remedy forthcoming from the “Congress”—quite the opposite; (4) the power we have that we can use and that is lawfully ours resides in the land jurisdiction and in the government of the land jurisdiction which is all but silenced and gone.
We can (and have already) discovered enough about the “United States of America, Inc.” and similarly named organizations to fill entire libraries— and all for naught so far as rectifying the situation goes.
So long as we are “deemed to be” wards of their states, we have no standing to bring complaints against them or their agencies or their franchises.
So long as that probate fraud is allowed to stand, we are nicely trapped and unable to reliably secure any remedy. We, the living people, don’t exist in their system and our ESTATES are owned and controlled by them.
Is it fraud? Yes. Is it actionable on a one by one basis? Yes.
But the real remedy lies in operating the government we are heir to and regaining our lawful enforcement powers on the land. Which is why I urge you all to (1) seize back control of your own estates by correcting the civil records kept by the probate courts in the counties where you were born and (2) reorganize and explicitly operate your counties on the land and your states on the land, which will give you enforcement power on the land and enable you to end the theft and fraud being practiced against you.
All this other “stuff”— tracking down the identities and relationships of the international corporations responsible is well and good but knowing the details gets us no farther forward in dealing with the actual ongoing crimes, nor does it do anything to enable enforcement of the Public Law.
Sign me— “Been There and Done That”.
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Steven Pattison (Kansas) <StevenPattison@everestkc.net> wrote:
Dear Dan and the others receiving this email. Only anyone that has stated their Standing will ever get any action from any appointed or elected Official!
There are at least two things anyone needs to do to get an answer or to serve a Notice to any elected or appointed officials which are required to take an Oath of Office.
First you have to identify who you are as Glenn Hughes did with his Constructive Notice. Glenn was in a District Court where the Judge told him that if Glenn did turn over his records to the IRS that he may have to put him in jail.
The short story is that the Constructive Notice was served on the Judge personally on June 6, 1997 meaning not within his court’s jurisdiction and six days letter Glenn receive a fax from the Court noticing Glenn that his case was dismissed with prejudice which means that it is dismissed permanently. A case dismissed with prejudice is over and done with, once and for all, and can’t be brought back to court.
Glenn has passed away and the last time I talked to his wife she told me that they have not ever gotten another letter from the IRS.
It is past time for the internet Patriots to wake up to the truth, learn it, and revise their commentary to fight it with all their might. This means educate the sheep non stop until they are as outraged as we all should be. We need to get this information out to a hundred million people ASAP. Why would an entire Nation accept a Corporation for a government? There is only one way for things to change for the better, and that is for a hundred million people to read this: You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause (Paperback) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1491279184/ref=cm_cr_asin_lnk
Anna and James should receive National support for this gift to America. Now there is no excuse to continue supporting the political system that enslaves us, and every reader should make it a personal obligation to promote this work. I envision a hundred million people reading this book over and over until they can recite verbatim the skullduggery used to rob, rape, and pillage millions of unsuspecting Americas; not to mention the trillions of dollars these Tyrant Bankers have made from our ignorance. This fiasco is akin to a Preacher in a mega Church raping the women thereof and getting away with it for years, because they had so much faith in him. I will demand every family member and friend read this magnificent piece of research. More praise and info on this book will continue to be available at http://scannedretina.com/ and http://anationbeguiled.com
GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS FOLKS, THE BASTARDS LIED TO US!
IF A MILLION PEOPLE DID THIS IS IN THE SAME MONTH, THE BANKING CARTEL WOULD BE PUKING THEIR GUTS OUT!
September 17th, 2015 by olddog
By CHUCK ROSS
President Obama announced a new executive order on Tuesday which authorizes federal agencies to conduct behavioral experiments on U.S. citizens in order to advance government initiatives.
“A growing body of evidence demonstrates that behavioral science insights — research findings from fields such as behavioral economics and psychology about how people make decisions and act on them — can be used to design government policies to better serve the American people,” reads the executive order, released on Tuesday.
The new program is the end result of a policy proposal the White House floated in 2013 entitled “Strengthening Federal Capacity for Behavioral Insights.”
According to a document released by the White House at that time, the program was modeled on one implemented in the U.K. in 2010. That initiative created a Behavioral Insights Teams, which used “iterative experimentation” to test “interventions that will further advance priorities of the British government.”
The initiative draws on research from University of Chicago economist Richard Thaler and Harvard law school professor Cass Sunstein, who was also dubbed Obama’s regulatory czar. The two behavioral scientists argued in their 2008 book “Nudge” that government policies can be designed in a way that “nudges” citizens towards certain behaviors and choices.
The desired choices almost always advance the goals of the federal government, though they are often couched as ways to cut overall program spending.
In its 2013 memo, which was reported by Fox News at the time, the White House openly admitted that the initiative involved behavioral experimentation.
“The federal government is currently creating a new team that will help build federal capacity to experiment with these approaches, and to scale behavioral interventions that have been rigorously evaluated, using, where possible, randomized controlled trials,” the memo read.
That document cited examples from the U.K. which showed that sending out a letter to late taxpayers which read “9 out of 10 people in Britain pay their taxes on time” led to a 15 percent increase in compliance.
The new executive order encourages federal agencies to “identify policies, programs, and operations where applying behavioral science insights may yield substantial improvements in public welfare, program outcomes, and program cost effectiveness,” as well as to “develop strategies for applying behavioral science insights to programs and, where possible, rigorously test and evaluate the impact of these insights.”
To jump-start the programs, agencies are encouraged to recruit behavioral science experts to join the federal government and to develop relationships with researchers in order to “better use empirical findings from the behavioral sciences.”
A fact sheet sent out by the White House on Tuesday shows that researchers at numerous universities and think tanks — from MIT, Harvard, and the Brookings Institute, to name a few — have signed on to the program.
The executive order specifically directs federal agencies to develop nudge programs that help individuals, families, communities and businesses “access public programs and benefits by, as appropriate, streamlining processes that may otherwise limit or delay participation.”
This can be achieved by “administrative hurdles, shortening wait times, and simplifying forms,” the order suggests.
The initiative also urges agencies to tinker with how information is presented to individuals, consumers, borrowers, and program beneficiaries.
The “content, format, timing, and medium by which information is conveyed” should be taken into consideration as those characteristics affect “comprehension and action by individuals.”
In programs that offer choices for consumers, agencies are instructed to “consider how the presentation and structure of those choices, including the order, number, and arrangement of options, can most effectively promote public welfare.”
The order also suggests that agencies fiddle with whether to label certain expenditures as “benefits, taxes, subsidies” or other incentives to “efficiently promote” programs.
President Obama’s federal health care law, Obamacare, is replete with “nudge” language and experimentation.
In its fact sheet, the White House noted that reminding individuals who had started to sign up for Obamacare led to a 13 percent increase in completed applications.
To help determine which presentation was more effective, the Department of Health and Human Services “sent one of eight behaviorally designed letter variants to each of more than 700,000 individuals who had already begun the health insurance enrollment process but had not yet completed an application.”
The most effective version of the letter generated the 13 percent improvement. Other less effective letters only increased enrollment rates by around four percent.
Another nudge contained in Obamacare was brought to light in the debate over whether the individual mandate contained in the law was a tax hike.
Republicans insisted that it was a tax increase, but the White House portrayed it as a penalty on the logic that the word “tax” has a negative connotation.
While the Obama administration touts nudge policies, others are hesitant to get on board.
“I am very skeptical of a team promoting nudge policies,” Michael Thomas, an economist at Utah State University, told Fox News in 2013.
“Ultimately, nudging…assumes a small group of people in government know better about choices than the individuals making them.”
Folks, we have a psychopath in the Black House!
September 16th, 2015 by olddog
By Brandon Smith
For the past several months, the chorus of voices crying out over the prospect of a Federal Reserve interest rate hike have all been saying essentially the same thing – either they can’t do it, or they simply won’t do it. This is the same attitude the chorus projected during the initial prospects of a QE taper. Given the trends and evidence at hand I personally will have to take the same position on the rate hike as I did with the taper – they can do it, and they probably will do it before the year is over.
I suppose we may know more after the conclusion of the Fed meeting set for the 16th and 17th of this month. August retail sales data and industrial production numbers have come in, and they are not impressive even with the artificial goosing such stats generally receive. However, I do not expect that they will have any bearing whatsoever on the interest rate theater. The Fed’s decision has already been made, probably months in advance.
The overall market consensus seems to be one of outright bewilderment, so much so that markets have reentered the madness of “bad news is good news” as stocks explode on any negative data that might suggest the Fed will delay. The so-called experts cannot grasp why the Fed would even entertain the notion of a rate hike at this stage in the game. Hilariously, it is Paul Krugman who is saying what I have been saying for the past year when he states:
“I really find it quite mysterious that the Fed is eager to raise rates given that, they’re going to be wrong one way or the other, we just don’t know which way. But the costs of being wrong in one direction are so much higher than the costs of being the other.”
Yes, why does the Fed seem so eager? Every quarter since the bailouts began no one has been asking for interest rates to increase. No one. Only recently has the Bank for International Settlements warned of market turmoil due to the long term saturation of markets caused by low interest policies, yet it was the BIS that had been championing low rates and easy money foryears. The IMF has warned that a U.S. rate increase at this time would cause a market crisis, yet the IMF has also been admonishing low rate policies, policies that they had also been originally supporting for years.
Confused yet? The investment world certainly seems to be. In fact, the overall market attitude towards a rate hike appears to be a heightened sense of terror, and I believe this has been amply reflected in global stock behavior over the past three months in particular. With thousands of points positive and negative spanned in only a couple of trading sessions, stock market indexes around the world are beginning to behave like seizure victims, jerking and convulsing erratically.
This has, of course, all been blamed on China’s supposed economic “contagion.” But you can read why that is utter nonsense in my article “Economic crisis goes mainstream – What happens next?”
The bottom line is, the Federal Reserve has been the primary driver of the massive financial bubbles now in place in most of the world’s markets, and much of this was accomplished through ZIRP (zero interest rate policy). Hopefully many of the readers here can recall the tens of trillions of dollars of overnight lending by the Fed to international banks and corporations that was exposed during the initial TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program – aka bailout) audit. You know, the trillions in lending that mainstream naysayers claimed was “not” contributing to the overall debt picture of the U.S. Well, reality has shown that ZIRP and overnight lending has indeed directly and indirectly created debt bubbles in numerous areas.
The most vital of areas at this time is perhaps the debts accrued by major banks and companies that have relied on overnight loans to facilitate massive stock buybacks. It has been these buybacks that have artificially supported stocks for years, and whenever ZIRP was not enough, the Fed stepped in with yet another QE program to give particular indicators a boost. The main purpose of this strategy was to ensure that markets would NOT reflect the real underlying instability of our economic system. The Fed has been pumping up banks and markets not only in the U.S., but across the globe. Why? We’ll get to that, but keep in mind that it takes time and careful strategy to wear down a population and condition them to accept far lower living standards as the “new normal” (and it takes a sudden crisis event to convince a population to be happy with such low standards given the frightening alternative).
Even with near zero interest, companies have still had to utilize a high percentage of profits in order to continue the stock buyback scam. We have finally arrived at a crossroads in which these companies will be forced to either stop buybacks altogether, or await another even more comprehensive stimulus infusion from the Fed. A rate increase of .25 percent might seem insignificant, until you realize that banks and companies have been cycling tens of trillions of dollars in ZIRP through their coffers and equities. At that level, a minor increase in borrowing costs swiftly accumulates into untenable debts. A rate increase will kill all overnight borrowing, it will kill stock buybacks, and thus, it will kill the fantasy that is today’s stock market.
This is why so many analysts simply cannot fathom why the Fed would raise rates, and why many people fully expect the introduction of QE4. But we need to ask some fundamental questions here…
Again, as Krugman ponders (or doesn’t ponder, since I believe he is an elitist insider with full knowledge of what is about to happen), why does the Fed seem so eager to raise rates if the obvious result will be a drawn out market crash? Is it possible, just maybe, that the Fed does not want to prop up markets anymore? Is it possible that the Fed’s job is to destroy the American economy and the dollar, rather than protecting either? Is it possible that the Fed is just a useful tool, an institutionally glorified suicide bomber meant to explode itself in the most populated area it can find to cause maximum damage for effect? Wouldn’t this dynamic go a long way in explaining why the Fed has taken every single action it has taken since its underhanded inception in 1913?
Will the Fed raise rates this week? I still think the Fed may “surprise” with a delay until December in order to give one more short term boost to the markets, but as I read the mainstream economic press I find the newest trend indicates I could be wrong. The trend I am speaking of has only launched in the past couple of days in the mainstream media, as outlets such as the Financial Times and CNN are now publishing arguments which claim a Fed rate hike is a “good thing”. While it may be a “good thing” in the long run as it is vital for everything that is over-inflated in our economy to fall away and leave that which is real behind, a return to true free markets without ZIRP manipulation is NOT what the mainstream media is promoting.
The mainstream pro-rate hike arguments are in most cases predicated on completely fabricated notions of economic recovery. CNN states:
“At a time when the U.S. economy is chugging along at over 2% growth and the unemployment rate reflects almost full employment, there’s not much of a case for the Fed’s key interest rate to remain at historic lows…”
As I outlined in my series written at the beginning of this year titled “One last look at the real economy before it implodes,” any growth in gross domestic product (GDP) is a farce driven primarily by government debt spending and inflation in particular necessities rather than recovery in the core economy and on main street. And, unemployment numbers are the biggest statistical con-game of all, with more than 93 million Americans not counted on the Labor Department’s rolls as unemployed because they no longer qualify for benefits.
For a couple of months, some of the mainstream has pulled its head out of its posterior and actually begun asking the questions alternative analysts have been asking for years about the potential risks of returning market volatility and “recession” (which is really an ongoing program of hyperstagflationary collapse) in the wake of a world without steady and open fiat stimulus. Yet, suddenly this week certain MSM establishment mouthpieces are claiming “mission accomplished” in the battle for fiscal recovery and cheerleading for a rate hike?
What this tells me is that the narrative is being shifted and a rate hike is indeed on the way, perhaps even this week.
It is important to note that this stampede over the edge of the cliff is not only being triggered by the Federal Reserve. Most central banks and China’s PBOC in particular is definitely part of the bigger problem, but only because China is working alongside international bankers to further their goal of total economic interdependence and centralization. China’s avid pursuit of SDR (special drawing rights) inclusion and its close relationship to the IMF and the BIS must be taken into account if one is to understand why the current fiscal crisis is developing the way it is.
China has recently announced it will be opening its onshore currency markets to foreign central banks, which essentially guarantees the inclusion of the yuan into the IMF’s SDR global currency basket by the middle of next year. The IMF’s decision to delay China’s inclusion until 2016 was clearly a calculated effort to make sure that they did not receive any blame for the market meltdown they know is coming; a meltdown that will accelerate to even more dangerous proportions as central banks begin to move away from the dollar as the world reserve and petro-currency.
In preparation for the global shift away from the dollar, China has begun dumping dollar denominated assets at historic levels while Chinese companies have begun reducing the amount of dollars they borrow for international transactions. Is this selloff designed to liquidate assets in order to support China’s ailing markets? No, not really.
China has been planning a decoupling from the U.S. dollar since at least 2005 when it introduced yuan denominated “Panda Bonds”, which at the time the media laughed at as some kind of novelty. In only ten years, China has slowly but surely spread yuan denominated instruments around the world in order to make China an alternative economic engine to the U.S. China, working with the BIS and IMF, have set the dollar up for an extreme devaluation and the U.S. Treasury has been set up for inevitable bankruptcy; and guess who will ride to our rescue when all seems lost? That’s right – the IMF and the BIS.
Will the Fed’s rate hike make U.S. bonds more desirable? Probably not. After a short term initial boost U.S. debt instruments will return to the path of de-dollarization. In the end, I believe the Fed rate hike will encourage more selling by the largest bond holders who will seek to make as much profit as possible until the bottom begins to fall out of the dollar. As China continues to sell off their treasury and dollar holdings, there will come a time when other global investors will feel forced to sell as well to avoid being the last idiot holding the bag when extreme devaluation takes place.
The Fed rate hike is a kind of openly engineered trigger event; one which will likely occur before the end of the year. The major globalist players within the BIS and IMF are separating themselves from this trigger as much as possible today, while warning of a coming crisis they helped to create.
The Fed seems to be a sacrificial appendage at this point, a martyr for the cause of globalization and centralization. Bringing down the U.S. and the dollar, or at least greatly diminishing the U.S. to third world status, has the potential to greatly benefit the Fabian socialists at the top of the pyramid. Such a crisis makes the idea of centralization and global economic administration a more enticing concept.
With a complex and disaster-prone system of interdependence causing social strife and chaos, why not just simplify everything with a global currency and perhaps even global governance? The elites will squeeze the collapse for all it’s worth if they can, and a Fed rate hike may be exactly what they need to begin the final descent.
If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.
You can contact Brandon Smith at:
September 14th, 2015 by olddog
By Porter Stansberry
For many years now, it’s been clear that China would soon be pulling the strings in the U.S. financial system.
In 2015, the American people owe the Chinese government nearly $1.5 trillion.
I know big numbers don’t mean much to most people, but keep in mind… this tab is now hundreds of billions of dollars more than what the U.S. government collects in ALL income taxes (both corporate and individual) each year. It’s basically a sum we can never, ever hope to repay – at least, not by normal means.
Of course, the Chinese aren’t stupid. They realize we are both trapped.
We are stuck with an enormous debt we can never realistically repay… And the Chinese are trapped with an outstanding loan they can neither get rid of, nor hope to collect. So the Chinese government is now taking a secret and somewhat radical approach.
China has recently put into place a covert plan to get back as much of its money as possible – by extracting colossal sums from both the United States government and ordinary citizens, like you and me.
The Chinese “State Administration of Foreign Exchange” (SAFE) is now engaged in a full-fledged currency war with the United States. The ultimate goal – as the Chinese have publicly stated – is to create a new dominant world currency, dislodge the U.S. dollar from its current reserve role, and recover as much of the $1.5 trillion the U.S. government has borrowed as possible.
Lucky for us, we know what’s going to happen. And we even have a pretty good idea of how it will all unfold. How do we know so much? Well, this isn’t the first time the U.S. has tried to stiff its foreign creditors.
Most Americans probably don’t remember this, but our last big currency war took place in the 1960s. Back then, French President Charles de Gaulle denounced the U.S. government’s policy of printing overvalued U.S. dollars to pay for its trade deficits… which allowed U.S. companies to buy European assets with dollars that were artificially held up in value by a gold peg that was nothing more than an accounting fiction. So de Gaulle took action…
In 1965, he took $150 million of his country’s dollar reserves and redeemed the paper currency for U.S. gold from Ft. Knox. De Gaulle even offered to send the French Navy to escort the gold back to France. Today, this gold is worth about $12 billion.
Keep in mind… this occurred during a time when foreign governments could legally redeem their paper dollars for gold, but U.S. citizens could not.
And France was not the only nation to do this… Spain soon redeemed $60 million of U.S. dollar reserves for gold, and many other nations followed suit. By March 1968, gold was flowing out of the United States at an alarming rate.
By 1950, U.S. depositories held more gold than had ever been assembled in one place in world history (roughly 702 million ounces). But to manipulate our currency, the U.S. government was willing to give away more than half of the country’s gold.
It’s estimated that during the 1950s and early 1970s, we essentially gave away about two-thirds of our nation’s gold reserves… around 400 million ounces… all because the U.S. government was trying to defend the U.S. dollar at a fixed rate of $35 per ounce of gold.
In short, we gave away 400 million ounces of gold and got $14 billion in exchange. Today, that same gold would be worth $620 billion… a 4,330% difference.
Incredibly stupid, wouldn’t you agree? This blunder cost the U.S. much of its gold hoard.
When the history books are finally written, this chapter will go down as one of our nation’s most incompetent political blunders. Of course, as is typical with politicians, they managed to make a bad situation even worse…
The root cause of the weakness in the U.S. dollar was easy to understand. Americans were consuming far more than they were producing. You could see this by looking at our government’s annual deficits, which were larger than ever and growing… thanks to the gigantic new welfare programs and the Vietnam “police action.” You could also see this by looking at our trade deficit, which continued to get bigger and bigger, forecasting a dramatic drop (eventually) in the value of the U.S. dollar.
Of course, economic realities are never foremost on the minds of politicians – especially not Richard Nixon’s. On August 15, 1971, he went on live television before the most popular show in America (Bonanza) and announced a new plan…
The U.S. gold window would close effective immediately – and no nation or individual anywhere in the world would be allowed to exchange U.S. dollars for gold. The president announced a 10% surtax on ALL imports!
Such tariffs never accomplish much in terms of actually altering the balance of trade, as our trading partners simply put matching charges on our exports. So what actually happens is just less trade overall, which slows the whole global economy, making the impact of inflation worse.
Of course, Nixon pitched these moves as patriotic, saying: “I am determined that the American dollar must never again be a hostage in the hands of international speculators.”
The “sheeple” cheered, as they always do whenever something is done to “stop the speculators.” But the joke was on them. Within two years, America was in its worst recession since WWII… with an oil crisis, skyrocketing unemployment, a 30% drop in the stock market, and soaring inflation. Instead of becoming richer, millions of Americans got a lot poorer, practically overnight.
And that brings us to today…
Roughly 40 years later, the United States is in the middle of another currency war. But this time, our main adversary is not Europe. It’s China. And this time, the situation is far more serious. Our nation and our economy are already in an extremely fragile state. In the 1960s, the American economy was growing rapidly, with decades of expansion still to come. That’s not the case today.
This new currency war with China will wreak absolute havoc on the lives of millions of ordinary Americans, much sooner than most people think. It’s critical over the next few years for you to understand exactly what the Chinese are doing, why they are doing it, and the near-certain outcome.
Editor’s note: Our colleague Matt Badiali just published a presentation explaining China’s plan to increase its power and damage the U.S. If Matt’s predictions are right, millions of Americans will be completely unprepared when China makes its announcements. Stock markets and currency markets could crash overnight.
To learn what this means for you… why he’s certain this rumor is true… and how to prepare – and profit – from this situation, be sure to watch Matt’s brand-new presentation. Learn more here.