Categories » ‘INTERNATIONAL BANKING CARTEL’
June 18th, 2014 by olddog
We’re always following the world’s economic trends and searching for the market-moving insight that everyone else has missed
By Dave Hodges
Even if Putin and Obama fail to realize the obvious, they are playing for the same team in a script that has been written for them to play out. The script will culminate in World War III.
The grand master controlling the world’s central banks needs World War III to happen. They need a war to unify the planet, socially, politically, economically and religiously. We are soon to learn the meaning of the popular NWO phrase, “Out of chaos comes order”.
The Death of the Dollar Is the Motivating Force Behind WW III
Russia is bleeding the Petrodollar dry by leading the BRIC nations in the purchase of Iranian oil for gold. The same situation is emerging in Europe as Russia is on the verge, either by invasion or by proxy control of Ukraine, of controlling a good portion of energy needs supplied to Europe, this coming winter. If Russia is able to bypass the Petrodollar as a means of payment for Russian energy shipments into Europe, Russia will destroy the United States economically.
Russia recently completed a deal which brings China into the Russian energy sphere of influence. If Europe becomes totally dependent on Putin supplying gas to Europe this winter, this will eventually culminate in the weakening of NATO and the isolation of the United States both economically and militarily if the United States fails to act decisively. And with China’s partnership, Putin has added muscle to back up his actions.
Putin and Obama Are Playing On the Same Team
What does Russia want and what will be its eventual goal? Some believe that Russia wants to occupy the United States and perhaps Putin eventually does, but it is not practical at this particular point of time. Economic attrition and military isolation are Putin’s best friends at this time. After all, the US is in possession of over 2,000 nuclear weapons and 72 nuclear armed submarines which are virtually undetectable. Despite the presence of these American deterrents, do not be lulled into a false sense of security, this cold war will soon turn hot and I find myself in agreement with Doug Hagmann on where this war will start and what forces will be involved.
Putin Is a Cult Hero
Putin is developing almost a cult following among some people in the alternative media. To them, he represents a man with the force of conviction to tell international banking where to go and what to do when they get there. On the surface, Putin champions Christianity, professes disdain for the gay agenda and almost sounds like a conservative as he is reading from the past scripts of Ronald Reagan.
Putin is no conservative, he is an evil despot who abused his ex-wife, imprisons enemies and murders journalists who expose his duplicity. To these misguided analysts and Putin supporters who believe that he has succeeded where other world leaders have lost their lives (e.g. JFK, Hussein, etc.), he has become a cult hero. As romantic and appealing as a superhero may be who will ride in and save the world from the evil bankers, nothing could be further from the truth when it comes to Putin. Whether Putin realizes it or not, he is doing the complete bidding of the big boys at the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and everything is moving right along according to plan.
The World’s Banking Hierarchy
In order to understand the present crisis, one has to understand how modern banking is organized. There are three distinct levels of hierarchal power associated with international banking.
On top of the pyramid, is the BIS. They set policy for the central banks and they control the relative value of all the national currencies. They literally have the power of life and death over all central banks.
Central banks, such as the Federal Reserve and the Bank of London, occupy the second level of power. In turn, the central banks control virtually every government on the planet. So, when it is said that “all wars are banker wars”, that axiom is correct.
At the third level, on this hierarchy, are the national banks and we know them as Bank of America and JP Morgan, etc. This is the side of banking that is visible to the majority of the public.
Central Banks and National Banks Are On Death’s Ground
The BIS has utilized the strategy of Sun Tzu and has placed its central bank minions on death’s ground. To Sun Tzu, being on death’s ground means that one is backed into a corner and either the cornered party fights and wins, or they die.
Several years ago, the BIS devised a plot to gain an irreversible hold on the central banks and that was through the introduction of the derivatives scheme. Derivatives, based upon unregulated and wild speculation, mostly in the futures commodities market, had the allure of easy money for groups like the Federal Reserve and Wall Street. The derivatives strategy was based on the principle of all money games, “First man in and first man out wins all the money”. Unfortunately for the banksters, there were no first men out. The BIS created process led to a total debt of $1.5 quadrillion dollars which is about eight times the entire value of the planet. The BIS contrived a scheme that ensnared all banking.Why? The answer is contained in the following paragraphs.
Predictably, when the over speculated commodities price began to roll up as it does in any Ponzi scheme, the central banks and their third level national banks went running for their very economic lives! This was the sole reason for the bail-outs and the arbitrary banking practices we are seeing enacted across the planet as central banks are stealing bank accounts, retirement accounts and have declared that they own your money when you deposit it. This is why you should get your money out of the bank.
Where Does Putin Fit In to This Scenario?
This BIS plot was an evil, yet brilliant move, because it placed central banks on death’s ground. This desperation will lead to WW III.
Putin is feeling the pinch because he must monetize his vast material resources through the BIS. For Putin, the survival of the dollar represent economic death for his currency and economic system as it has for most planet’s economies since the inception of Britton Woods which made the dollar the world’s reserve currency.
Certainly, the Federal Reserve is in crisis mode as it spends all of its energy fighting to preserve the what’s left of the dollar. The control of the dollar is a big prize, because the winner will dominate central banking. For if Putin is successful in moving most of the world away from the dollar, the dollar and the United State empire will die. If the Federal Reserve prevails and reestablishes the power of the dollar, Putin’s economic empire will be subservient to the whims of the Federal Reserve. Putin and Obama are on a collision course towards World War III because this issue will not get settled without a fight.
Although America has 42% of the world’s millionaires, this could disappear overnight if the Federal Reserve collapses. To survive, the Federal Reserve desperately needs a war against the source of its economic distress and that means going to war with Russia as well as China, if need be. Virtually, every Western central bank is on death’s ground and the world is on a collision course for war.
Putin Is Winning So Far
In the present Petrodollar crisis, the central banks have failed to reign in Putin. Although it is true Putin is enriching himself with his access to vast mineral resources and this growing economic empire has convinced China, India, Brazil and South Africa (BRICS) to move under the Russian energy-based economic umbrella, Putin, however, cannot escape the fact that he must monetize his material wealth in order for him to participate in international trade. In order for Putin to monetize his wealth, he needs to remain a part of the Bank of International Settlement (BIS). Putin may not operate his own central bank in the same manner as the rest of the world, thus giving the illusion that he is independent of the boys from Basel, however, the BIS still controls the distribution of his purse strings and the dollar remains a threat to the Russian economy because the use of the dollar cuts most of the profit out of Russia’s energy trade.
Since Putin is under the umbrella of the BIS and Obama is under the umbrella of the Federal Reserve, who answers to the BIS, it is safe to conclude that Obama and Putin are controlled by the same forces. As nobody with any real knowledge of politics would accuse the Democrats and the Republicans of really possessing opposing ideologies, the same can be said for Putin and Obama. Although it is true that Putin and Obama will eventually go to war in Syria, let’s make no mistake about it, Obama and Putin are playing out a script that has been written by the BIS.
The failure of the central banks to corral and control Putin has made World War III a likely scenario. As Putin continues on the path of destroying the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, what will the Federal Reserve do? There will be a war to preserve the status quo. As China, Russia and the United States are drawn into a confrontation, the world’s economy will be obliterated along with billions of lives. In the aftermath of the coming global holocaust, the supreme financial rulers of the planet will be waiting to create order, the New World Order, out of chaos. The BIS is getting exactly what they need to unify the planet.
A willing pawn of the NWO, or not, Putin is no hero. He is doing exactly what is expected. Make no mistake about, the BIS controls the central banks, world finance and Putin. The New World Order is very much alive. And when your children are sent to fight and die in World War III, I think you and they have right to know who they are fighting for and why they must die.
June 17th, 2014
Copyright © 2014 InvestmentWatch – All Rights Reserved
Powered by WordPress & the Atahualpa Theme by BytesForAll. Discuss on our WP Forum
June 17th, 2014 by olddog
By Neal Ross
It has been commented that I have strayed from my purpose in writing, that instead of trying to educate and inform people that I have taken to criticizing and insulting them. I won’t deny that I have, of late, felt a deep sense of frustration and, even, anger that the things I have written have not been effective in changing the hearts and minds of the people to whom I was addressing them. Nonetheless, I have been remiss and I apologize for being so harsh and critical. With that in mind I would like to attempt to write a bit about the general thoughts and beliefs of the men who existed during the time our country fought for its independence, and established our system of government.
Although there is not a man or woman alive today who was present in the mid to late 1700′s, it was a unique time in the history of our nation, and in political thinking in general. There had always been philosophers and political thinkers throughout the ages, but there was something exceptional about the time when our nation came into existence. All through the ages most forms of government came about by many ways, most of which the people had absolutely no say in. As Thomas Paine wrote in his book The Rights of Man, “All power exercised over a nation, must have some beginning. It must either be delegated or assumed. There are no other sources. All delegated power is trust, and all assumed power is usurpation. Time does not alter the nature and quality of either….” Yet during the late 1700′s delegates from the thirteen original colonies gathered together in Philadelphia and drafted a Constitution which outlined a system of government.
You have to wonder, what guided these men? What were the beliefs they held which they introduced into the discussions on what shape, and how our system of government would function? Sure, there were some delegates who proposed another monarchy in which the executive, (the president), would hold office for his entire lifetime, and would have an absolute veto over any laws proposed by the legislative, (the Congress). But as we all know, that was not what they ended up producing. They created a perfectly balanced system in which a legislative body created law, the executive executed and ensured the laws where upheld, and a judicial which settled disputes in regards to the fundamental law of the land, i.e. the Constitution.
The Constitution itself is pretty straightforward as to how our system of government was to be established, and the powers it granted government, although today most people would be surprised to learn that most of what the government does is not among those powers.
Yet the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Again, quoting from Paine’s Rights of Man, “A constitution is not a thing in name only, but in fact. It has not an ideal, but a real existence; and wherever it cannot be produced in a visible form, there is none. A constitution is a thing antecedent to a government, and a government is only the creature of a constitution. The constitution of a country is not the act of its government, but of the people constituting its government. It is the body of elements, to which you can refer, and quote article by article; and which contains the principles on which the government shall be established, the manner in which it shall be organized, the powers it shall have, the mode of elections, the duration of Parliaments, or by what other name such bodies may be called; the powers which the executive part of the government shall have; and in fine, everything that relates to the complete organization of a civil government, and the principles on which it shall act, and by which it shall be bound. A constitution, therefore, is to a government what the laws made afterwards by that governments are to a court of judicature. The court of judicature does not make the laws, neither can it alter them; it only acts in conformity to the laws made: and the government is in like manner governed by the constitution.”
But I haven’t answered my own question yet, what was it that our Founding Fathers believed that guided them in designing this system of government. If I would have to guess, I would say that many were influenced by an Englishman named John Locke. I know for a fact that Jefferson styled much of the Declaration of Independence after Locke’s Second Treatise on Civil Governments. In the Declaration of Independence Jefferson wrote, “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
Now take a look at what Locke said in Section 149 of his Second Treatise, “… there remains still in the people a supreme power to remove or alter the legislative, when they find the legislative act contrary to the trust reposed in them: for all power given with trust for the attaining an end, being limited by that end, whenever that end is manifestly neglected, or opposed, the trust must necessarily be forfeited, and the power devolve into the hands of those that gave it, who may place it anew where they shall think best for their safety and security.”
Strikingly similar, wouldn’t you say?
In the introduction to my copy of Locke’s treatise it says, “The central principles of what today is broadly known as political liberalism–individual liberty, the rule of law, government by consent of the people, and the right to private property–were made current in large part by Locke’s Second Treatise.” So if this work by an 18th century English philosopher was so influential to our Founders, don’t you think it might be a good idea to take a look to see what he said? I don’t know about you, but I found it fascinating, and I’ve read it four times already.
Locke begins at, well, the beginning, what state men are in prior to the existence of any form of government. In Section 4 he states, “TO understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man.” Again, that sounds strikingly similar to something Thomas Jefferson said. In an 1816 letter to Francis Gilmer, Jefferson wrote, “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.”
This was the state that men were in before the existence or establishment of societies and of governments, of the perfect free will to do as they felt fit with their lives, as long as they did not interfere with others from doing the same. But what if others did interfere with the rights, or property of another? Well, Locke addressed that as well.
In Section 7 Locke states, “And that all men may be restrained from invading others rights, and from doing hurt to one another, and the law of nature be observed, which willeth the peace and preservation of all mankind, the execution of the law of nature is, in that state, put into every man’s hands, whereby every one has a right to punish the transgressors of that law to such a degree, as may hinder its violation…“
Then in Section 11 he adds,”… and thus it is, that every man, in the state of nature, has a power to kill a murderer, both to deter others from doing the like injury, which no reparation can compensate, by the example of the punishment that attends it from every body, and also to secure men from the attempts of a criminal, who having renounced reason, the common rule and measure God hath given to mankind, hath, by the unjust violence and slaughter he hath committed upon one, declared war against all mankind, and therefore may be destroyed as a lion or a tiger, one of those wild savage beasts, with whom men can have no society nor security: and upon this is grounded that great law of nature…“
Furthermore, in Section 12 he states, “By the same reason may a man in the state of nature punish the lesser breaches of that law. It will perhaps be demanded, with death? I answer, each transgression may be punished to that degree, and with so much severity, as will suffice to make it an ill bargain to the offender, give him cause to repent, and terrify others from doing the like.”
And finally, in Section 17 he concludes by saying, “And hence it is, that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power, does thereby put himself into a state of war with him; it being to be understood as a declaration of a design upon his life: for I have reason to conclude, that he who would get me into his power without my consent, would use me as he pleased when he had got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it; for no body can desire to have me in his absolute power, unless it be to compel me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom, i.e. make me a slave. To be free from such force is the only security of my preservation; and reason bids me look on him, as an enemy to my preservation, who would take away that freedom which is the fence to it; so that he who makes an attempt to enslave me, thereby puts himself into a state of war with me.”
This is how men dealt with offenses and violations of their right prior to their entering into civil societies, they took the law into their own hands and where judge, jury, and, if required, executioner. But not only could this be abused, it also was found to be lacking in that often one person could not provide himself adequate protection against the violations of their ‘natural rights.’ So men formed civil societies to better protect their rights.
But, as Locke would say in Section 23, “This freedom from absolute, arbitrary power, is so necessary to, and closely joined with a man’s preservation, that he cannot part with it, but by what forfeits his preservation and life together: for a man, not having the power of his own life, cannot, by compact, or his own consent, enslave himself to any one, nor put himself under the absolute, arbitrary power of another, to take away his life, when he pleases. No body can give more power than he has himself; and he that cannot take away his own life, cannot give another power over it.” So when men entered into civil societies they did not make themselves slaves unto those who would administer the law, they merely delegated them just enough power and authority to better safeguard their rights.
Or as he states in Section 123, “IF man in the state of nature be so free, as has been said; if he be absolute lord of his own person and possessions, equal to the greatest, and subject to no body, why will he part with his freedom? why will he give up this empire, and subject himself to the dominion and controul of any other power? To which it is obvious to answer, that though in the state of nature he hath such a right, yet the enjoyment of it is very uncertain, and constantly exposed to the invasion of others: for all being kings as much as he, every man his equal, and the greater part no strict observers of equity and justice, the enjoyment of the property he has in this state is very unsafe, very unsecure. This makes him willing to quit a condition, which, however free, is full of fears and continual dangers: and it is not without reason, that he seeks out, and is willing to join in society with others, who are already united, or have a mind to unite, for the mutual preservation of their lives, liberties and estates, which I call by the general name, property.”
By entering into a civil society some authority must be granted to someone, or a body of men, to enact laws to serve the purpose for which men entered into that society, i.e. the preservation of their rights. Yet, as Locke would say, that power which was delegated to this body could not be arbitrary, nor could it usurp powers which were beyond the purpose for which it was created.
In Section 135 Locke states, “Though the legislative, whether placed in one or more, whether it be always in being, or only by intervals, though it be the supreme power in every common-wealth; yet, First, It is not, nor can possibly be absolutely arbitrary over the lives and fortunes of the people: for it being but the joint power of every member of the society given up to that person, or assembly, which is legislator; it can be no more than those persons had in a state of nature before they entered into society, and gave up to the community: for no body can transfer to another more power than he has in himself; and no body has an absolute arbitrary power over himself, or over any other, to destroy his own life, or take away the life or property of another. A man, as has been proved, cannot subject himself to the arbitrary power of another; and having in the state of nature no arbitrary power over the life, liberty, or possession of another, but only so much as the law of nature gave him for the preservation of himself, and the rest of mankind; this is all he doth, or can give up to the common-wealth, and by it to the legislative power, so that the legislative can have no more than this. Their power, in the utmost bounds of it, is limited to the public good of the society. It is a power, that hath no other end but preservation, and therefore can never have a right to destroy, enslave, or designedly to impoverish the subjects.”
This is almost the same thing a Frenchman named Frederic Bastiat would say in 1850, “If every person has the right to defend—even by force—his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right—its reason for existing, its lawfulness—is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force—for the same reason—cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.”
So, when a group enters into a civil or political society, they surrender their authority under natural law and give it to the magistrate, or servant whom is to act to preserve the rights of the people in said society. But what if your rights come under attack and you have no means of contacting the agent whose job it is to protect them? Well, in that case the right devolves back to you. In Section 87 Locke says as much, “But because no political society can be, nor subsist, without having in itself the power to preserve the property, and in order thereunto, punish the offences of all those of that society; there, and there only is political society, where every one of the members hath quitted this natural power, resigned it up into the hands of the community in all cases that exclude him not from appealing for protection to the law established by it.” Although that is not explicit in saying such, I would take that to mean that if your life, or your property, is in danger, and you cannot expect an immediate response from those agents whose job it is to protect these things, then you have the right to protect them yourself, up to and including killing the person threatening you.
If you don’t believe that, just prior to the above quote from Section 87 Locke ALSO said, “Man being born, as has been proved, with a title to perfect freedom, and an uncontrolled enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of the law of nature, equally with any other man, or number of men in the world, hath by nature a power, not only to preserve his property, that is, his life, liberty and estate, against the injuries and attempts of other men; but to judge of, and punish the breaches of that law in others, as he is persuaded the offence deserves, even with death itself, in crimes where the heinousness of the fact, in his opinion, requires it.”
As long as men remain in a civil or political society, and have surrendered certain of their rights to the body which they have established to preserve their rights, i.e. their life and their ability to own and enjoy property, and that said society functions as designed, the people must allow the government to do it’s job and not take the law into their own hands.
However, as is the case with human nature, people in power tend to try and amass more power unto themselves. Thus, in this instance, the legislative body has overstepped its power and is in violation of the agreement, be it a charter or a constitution, which granted them power. In our system the government we established has created numerous agencies which have the power of producing regulations which affect our lives adversely. This is done under the mistaken belief that the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution authorized the government to do WHATEVER it thinks is necessary to protect us, be it from crime, the food we eat, and, even, ourselves.
Yet the government cannot delegate its legislative power to another body that is not accountable to the people. In Section 141 of Locke’s treatise he states, “Fourthly, The legislative cannot transfer the power of making laws to any other hands: for it being but a delegated power from the people, they who have it cannot pass it over to others. The people alone can appoint the form of the common-wealth, which is by constituting the legislative, and appointing in whose hands that shall be.”
And if the legislative acts outside its specified purpose, what authority do the people have? Well, as I previously mentioned in the similarity between our Declaration of Independence and Locke’s treatise, Section 149 states, “THOUGH in a constituted common-wealth, standing upon its own basis, and acting according to its own nature, that is, acting for the preservation of the community, there can be but one supreme power, which is the legislative, to which all the rest are and must be subordinate, yet the legislative being only a fiduciary power to act for certain ends, there remains still in the people a supreme power to remove or alter the legislative, when they find the legislative act contrary to the trust reposed in them: for all power given with trust for the attaining an end, being limited by that end, whenever that end is manifestly neglected, or opposed, the trust must necessarily be forfeited, and the power devolve into the hands of those that gave it, who may place it anew where they shall think best for their safety and security. “
I talk a lot using terms such as oppression, tyranny, and usurpation. I’m sure that many of you don’t really understand the difference between the words. In Section 199 Locke explains the difference between usurpation and tyranny, “AS usurpation is the exercise of power, which another hath a right to; so tyranny is the exercise of power beyond right, which no body can have a right to. And this is making use of the power any one has in his hands, not for the good of those who are under it, but for his own private separate advantage. When the governor, however intitled, makes not the law, but his will, the rule; and his commands and actions are not directed to the preservation of the properties of his people, but the satisfaction of his own ambition, revenge, covetousness, or any other irregular passion.”
While we may foolishly believe that simply because we have the choice of voting for those who represent us in our system of government that tyranny cannot arise in America, think again. In Section 201 Locke warns, “It is a mistake, to think this fault is proper only to monarchies; other forms of government are liable to it, as well as that: for wherever the power, that is put in any hands for the government of the people, and the preservation of their properties, is applied to other ends, and made use of to impoverish, harass, or subdue them to the arbitrary and irregular commands of those that have it; there it presently becomes tyranny, whether those that thus use it are one or many.”
I am always harping about violations of the Constitution, yet people seem to think that, if they even care, it is no big deal that our government does things which the Constitution does not permit. Yet it is the ONLY reason our government exists. Without it there would BE NO government. In Section 212 Locke declares, “The constitution of the legislative is the first and fundamental act of society, whereby provision is made for the continuation of their union, under the direction of persons, and bonds of laws, made by persons authorized thereunto, by the consent and appointment of the people, without which no one man, or number of men, amongst them, can have authority of making laws that shall be binding to the rest. When any one, or more, shall take upon them to make laws, whom the people have not appointed so to do, they make laws without authority, which the people are not therefore bound to obey; by which means they come again to be out of subjection, and may constitute to themselves a new legislative, as they think best, being in full liberty to resist the force of those, who without authority would impose any thing upon them.”
Finally, in Section 222 Locke states what is the peoples right when the legislative authority seeks to pass laws which are contrary to its purpose, and which would enslave them under arbitrary power, “The reason why men enter into society, is the preservation of their property; and the end why they choose and authorize a legislative, is, that there may be laws made, and rules set, as guards and fences to the properties of all the members of the society, to limit the power, and moderate the dominion, of every part and member of the society: for since it can never be supposed to be the will of the society, that the legislative should have a power to destroy that which every one designs to secure, by entering into society, and for which the people submitted themselves to legislators of their own making; whenever the legislators endeavor to take away, and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge, which God hath provided for all men, against force and violence.”
Yet some say that I talk of rebellion and am unpatriotic because I do not stand behind and support my government. Why should I when it does not stand behind and support the purpose for which it was created in the first place? They say that by openly disregarding laws which I feel are unconstitutional I will bring violence and death upon those who do so because our government is ready, and willing to enforce its laws at gunpoint, I have something to say.
If that happens, and blood is spilled by people who are tired of an overreaching government, then the blood will be on their hands, not ours. In Section 228 of his treatise Locke says, “But if they, who say it lays a foundation for rebellion, mean that it may occasion civil wars, or intestine broils, to tell the people they are absolved from obedience when illegal attempts are made upon their liberties or properties, and may oppose the unlawful violence of those who were their magistrates, when they invade their properties contrary to the trust put in them; and that therefore this doctrine is not to be allowed, being so destructive to the peace of the world: they may as well say, upon the same ground, that honest men may not oppose robbers or pirates, because this may occasion disorder or bloodshed. If any mischief come in such cases, it is not to be charged upon him who defends his own right, but on him that invades his neighbours.”
We the people of this country entered into a political society by establishing a Constitution which granted the government certain defined powers. We did not create a government to babysit us and to care for us from cradle to grave. The purpose for which our government was created is explained in the Preamble to the Constitution, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Notice that it says secure the blessings of liberty and ensure justice. Now I would hope that those words are understood by my readers. But to be sure, liberty is defined as: the state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely; the power to do or choose what you want to. And while we may think we understand what justice is, I’m not so sure we do.
In 1841 John Quincy Adams, our sixth president, came out of retirement to argue a case before the Supreme Court. In his opening argument Mr. Adams gave what I believe to be the best explanation/definition of the word justice that I have ever read. Mr. Adams declared that “Justice, as defined in the Institutes of Justinian, nearly 2000 years ago, and as it felt and understood by all who understand human relations and human rights, is—”Constans et perpetua voluntas, jus suum cuique tribuendi.” “The constant and perpetual will to secure to every one HIS OWN right.”
While I may have overloaded you with input, these are/were the beliefs held by the men who established our system of government. They may not be popular, or politically correct in today’s society, but they were commonly held beliefs in the 1700′s.
I honestly don’t know that even if the people begin believing in these things again we can restore our country to one of limited government. It may be too late. To use a football analogy, it is the fourth quarter with two minutes remaining. You are out of time outs and are down by 35 points and your opponent is in possession of the ball. Not much you can do at this point, is there?
While I’m not giving up, I am a realist. I see society today and I don’t see much interest in returning to the values our Framers held. Sure I see a lot of people mad at the government for screwing things up. But what I don’t see is anyone looking to return to the limited government as outlined by the Constitution. As long as we continue to accept mediocrity, and even corruption, in the people we choose to represent us, as long as we meekly obey the endless laws and regulations which run contrary to the purpose for which government was established, as long as we believe that there is that big a difference between the two parties in this country, I don’t see much hope for anything changing.
Hopefully some record will remain of the writers, myself among them, who tried to warn the people about the state of affairs in this country. Maybe future generations may learn from our mistakes. But as far as us saving this country, I don’t see any hope for that.
So enjoy what is left of your liberty, for that too will soon be gone…
Student of history, politics, patriot and staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment
Send: all comments to firstname.lastname@example.org
Check out Neil’s books at: http://thebookshelf.us
If you liked Neal’s latest column, maybe you’ll like his latest booklet: The Civil War: (The Truth You Have Not Been Told) AND don’t forget to pick up your copy of ROSS: Unmasked
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice
And American’s have chosen ignorance over the time commitment to learn. They would much rather spend their time watching the stupid mind numbing show’s on TV, sport’s, or just gazing at their toes. The price of ignorance is slavery.
June 15th, 2014 by olddog
Ever since the Liberty/Patriot Movement began in the 1990′s, the powers that be have been working tirelessly to discredit or destroy anyone associated with it. The idea of an armed populous is beyond annoying to the government but a group of Americans willing to fight for their rights is unacceptable in the Police State. Groups like the 3%ers and the Oath Keepers have been labeled terrorist organizations by such groups as the SPLC in order to set the stage for an all out assault on freedom loving Americans all over the country. We must begin to understand that desiring peace will not prevent the puppet masters who control this nation from bringing the war upon us. The war for this nation has begun and putting our heads in the sand will not change this reality.
There is a reason why the word patriot has become synonymous with domestic terrorism in this nation. The American people have been made to believe that anyone who is willing to stand and defend the rights our forefathers fought for is an anti-government terrorist. This propaganda war has been raging since the early 90′s and it has been extremely effective. Additionally, even though the majority of patriots have been law abiding and well adjusted Americans, the mainstream media has been focusing exclusively on crackpots such as the Las Vegas shooters. Even though the majority of us are quiet professionals who are standing by and preparing,
most people think of people like Timothy McVeigh when they think of members of the militia and others in the liberty movement. This is not a coincidence but an intentional operation to make it more palatable for the rest of the country when our brothers and sisters start getting rounded up. Many of us believe that a singular action by our government will be the catalyst that will galvanize the people into standing up, but this is not the case. If the people are made to think that patriots are a threat to the nation, they will applaud when the government brings the hammer down. That is the whole point of this Public Relations war. Even if the government had used military force (which they were seriously considering) on the Bundy Ranch, the people would have most likely cheered.
I have been called a conspiracy nut by many people when I talk about how the government will be targeting anyone who they deem a risk, yet when you look at all the evidence combined it shifts this beyond being a possibility and into the realm of probable. Beyond the facts that local law enforcement agencies around the country are being equipped with the tools of war by the federal government and that the Department of Homeland Security is arming up for a massive conflict, the people have been numbed to the point of apathy to such an extent that they will accept pretty much any abuse met out against the citizenry of this nation. All this preparation has been done by the government intentionally in an effort to prepare for the final showdown between those in power and small groups of men and women who are willing to fight to stop them. For those of you who think I am sensationalizing this, consider how seriously the government is taking the threat of internal conflict. Consider the billions of rounds of hollow point ammunition and up-armored vehicles purchased by the DHS. Consider the militarization of local law enforcement. Consider the multiple laws passed by the government stripping away due process. Consider the national effort to take away our ability to defend ourselves/take the fight to the tyrants.
So, what does this mean for you? Simply put, keep doing what you’re doing and as fast as possible. It is likely that in the near future it will become all but impossible to stock up on certain supplies (firearms, ammunition, etc.) or to find like minded patriots to train with and watch your back without being flagged for detainment. Additionally, you need to get your head around the fact that in the not sodistant future you might end up being the bad guy in the eyes of a huge section of the United States. It would be a lonely existence if you do not have brothers and sisters to stand next to you if it becomes necessary to fight. History will judge this struggle as just, but the present will make it very difficult to be a patriot.
In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.– Mark Twain
From what I have seen of my fellow American’s, the majority are the most cognitive dissonant, hard headed fools ever to walk this earth, and in spite of that we are still willing to die for their undeserving benefit. Freedom from oppressive governance comes at a high price, and only those willing to pay it have been able to preserve it.
June 13th, 2014 by olddog
By Melissa Melton
In a recent article posted on Army Times, an Indiana sheriff justified his department’s purchase of a discount mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) military vehicle because,“The United States of America has become a war zone.
” Pulaski County Sheriff Michael Gayer, who along with 7 other law enforcement agencies across Indiana recently acquired MRAPs from the Department of Defense’s 1033 military surplus program, went on to say, “You are seeing police departments going to a semi-military format because of the threats we have to counteract,” and “It’s a lot more intimidating than a Dodge.
” The whole of Pulaski County, it should be noted, has a total population of less than 14,000 people. The MRAP is a $700,000, 60,000-pound, heavily armored bulletproof monster with a gunner’s turret originally designed for war in Iraqi battlefields. Now local law enforcement agencies across the country are getting them for next-to-nothing (or even free in some cases) to “police” American streets. To give you an idea, here’s a small smattering of other departments that have received an MRAP thus far:
- High Springs, Fla. Police Department, pop. 5,350
- Lewisburg, Tenn. Police Department, pop. 10,413
- Nixa, Mo. Police Department, pop. 19,022
- New Mexico State University campus PD
- Ohio State University campus PD
- Madison, Ind. Police Department, pop. 12,083
- Willimantic, Conn. Police Department, pop. 17,737
- Justice, Ill. Police Department, pop. 12,926
- Roanoke Rapids, N.C. Police Department, pop. 16,957
- Dundee, Mich. Police Department, pop. 3,957
Most every state in the nation has at least one MRAP, many have more. Many receiving towns have less than 30,000 people and far below average crime rates that hardly justify or necessitate the need of a tank.
According to The New York Times, 432 MRAPs have been doled out to departments thus far. (At least the turrets get removed.) The Pentagon reportedly plans to offload some 13,000 MRAPs. In addition to MRAPs, over $4 billion in surplus military equipment has also been handed over to U.S. law enforcement agencies through the Pentagon program.
Article after article has pointed out that many of these police departments do not even have protocol in place to define under exactly what circumstances the MRAP can and should be deployed.
USA Today obtained Morgan County, Indiana’s MRAP application through a public records request which said the vehicle would be used for “active shooter, barricaded suspect, emergency response, critical incident, hostage rescue, natural disaster rescue, drug search warrants and felony arrest warrants”.
In Lewisburg, Tennessee, the MRAP was rolled through a neighborhood to serve a warrant on someone considered a violent suspect, for example.
Other justifications? Our veterans: “You have a lot of people who are coming out of the military that have the ability and knowledge to build I.E.D.’s and to defeat law enforcement techniques,” Sgt. Dan Downing of the Morgan County Sheriff’s Department told the local Fox affiliate, referring to improvised explosive devices, or homemade bombs. (source) Of the MRAP his department received, Albany County, New York Sheriff Craig Apple told the Associated Press, “It’s armored. It’s heavy. It’s intimidating. And it’s free.”
It’s been noted that the MRAP intimidation factor might lend to departments finding more and more reasons to use them on American Streets in the future, leading to even further militarization of our nation’s police (on top of what $35 billion in Department of Homeland Security grants to fight “terrorism” has already accomplished in that regard).
In addition, The Rise of the Warrior Cop author Radley Balko says that those Homeland Security grants have also created a new industry where military contractors market themselves to police departments — furthering the cycle of police militarization: “A new industry appears to be emerging just to convert those grants into battle-grade gear,” Balko wrote. “That means we’ll soon have powerful private interests, funded by government grants, who will lobby for more government grants to pay for further militarization — a police industrial complex.” [emphasis added] (source) Once a town gets a SWAT team, Balko has noted that of course they want to find reasons to use it.
One hundred to 150 SWAT raids occur in this country each day now.
More than 90% of towns with 50,000 people or more have SWAT teams in America — teams which look more like military units going to battle than police officers fighting city crime — and they are being deployed more and more, sometimes for seemingly ridiculous reasons. In Florida for example, The New York Times reports that SWAT-style teams have been used to raid barbershops, resulting only in charges of “barbering without a license” (wooooo). So if America is a “war zone,” does that mean our police departments are going to war? Because they’re certainly gearing up for it.
Melissa Melton is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheeple, where this first appeared, and a co-creator of Truthstream Media. Wake the flock up!
Let’s face the facts! Our federal government has been taken over by the cohorts of the Banking Cartel and are intent on totalitarianism in every country on earth, and our local governments are becoming just like them, but there is a weak spot in their plan as local governments are more subject to voter pressure. Contact your local government leaders and make it plain they will be disgraced locally if they subscribe to this invasion of our freedoms. Honest American’s must face up to these tyrants and refuse to support anyone participating in this false war on the people. Americans are not at war with their government! Our governments are at war with us. STAND UP!
June 9th, 2014 by olddog
By David DeGraw, AmpedStatus Report
“The conflicting propaganda of opposing parties is essentially what leads to political abstention. But this is not the abstention of the free spirit which asserts itself; it is the result of resignation, the external symptom of a series of inhibitions. Such a man has not decided to abstain; under diverse pressures, subjected to shocks and distortions, he can no longer (even if he wanted to) perform a political act. What is even more serious is that this inhibition not only is political, but also progressively takes over the whole of his being and leads to a general attitude of surrender.” — Jacques Ellul, Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes
The primary reason why the Economic Elite have gained such dominance is their commitment to psychological operations that divide-and-conquer the US public. They use their overwhelming influence over mainstream media outlets and political candidates in very clever ways to divide us.
It is known among political scientists that powerful forces always seek to gain control of pre-existing social and political institutions so they can usurp their powers. The Economic Elite gained control of both the Democratic and Republican political parties because they knew that hardworking Americans loyally followed these parties, and we believed these parties were looking out for our best interests. We have, for the most part, been lifelong Republicans or lifelong Democrats, but until we see that our favored party has been seized by power and greed addicted interests, we will all continue to lose. These are extremely hard truths to face, but until we face them, we will continue our decline.
With half the US population loyal to Democrats and the other half loyal to Republicans, gaining control of both these parties meant total control for them. The past decade is testament to their total control of both parties.
In manufactured public opinion, Obama represented a far left swing in US politics, and Bush represented a far right swing, and these two supposed polar opposites also had a Congress overwhelmingly run by members of their own party. Did we get drastically different policies? In what matters most, in both cases, the results were the same: more money and power for the Economic Elite and the continued decline of the US middle class. This fact is now undeniable.
Yes, there are definite differences in their rhetoric and on some social issues, but this is the key to the psychological operations, to the divide-and-conquer strategy that they use so effectively.
To distract and divide us, they use rhetoric on social issues like religion, gay marriage, abortion, etc., all serious and significant issues that we bitterly disagree on, but in the overall picture, these issues are secondary to the larger, more fundamental political and economic issues that lead to our wealth being stolen from us, and ultimately, our lives being increasingly dominated by a small few.
Bush appealed to conservative Republicans and then ran up the deficit to record levels. Obama appealed to liberal Democrats, but increased war spending and support for Wall Street billionaires. In both cases, the candidates severely divided the US middle class, but in the policy decisions that mattered most, they both sided with the economic top one percent at the expense of hardworking Americans.
Just look at the last few election cycles. In 2006 and 2008 US citizens rose up in record-breaking numbers to kick out the Republicans in power, whom they felt had betrayed them. Now, with the Democrats in power, the consensus seems to be that in the 2010 mid-term elections we will vote for Republicans and kick out the Democrats who have failed to deliver on the much needed and promised changes.
Do you not see the ridiculous nature of this divide-and-conquer strategy? This is a vicious cycle that will continue to lead to our destruction.
Psychological Operations 101: Obama Vs. Fox News
For those of us who are strong enough to see beyond our propaganda-induced preconceptions and prejudices, the insidious nature of the Economic Elite’s divide-and-conquer strategy is on full display in the feud between Obama and Fox News. About half of the country loves Obama and hates Fox News, and the other half loves Fox News but hates Obama. They both use very effective propaganda to seduce their followers. However, as hard as it is for people who love one of them to admit, they both serve the same masters.
Once again, let’s look at Goldman Sachs. They financed Obama’s campaign and he has rewarded them with policies that have led to them making record-breaking profits, instead of investigating them for the many illegal activities they participated in and continue to take part in.
On the other side of this psychological operation, you have Fox News. When was the last time you saw Fox News doing an investigation into the illegal practices of Goldman Sachs? Even the Obama-appointed Tim Geithner, the Economic Elite’s main man on the economy, escapes the significant focus of Fox News’ powerful attack force.
Looking at the Business Roundtable, a significant majority of Obama’s campaign funding came from Roundtable members and, as mentioned earlier, he frequently meets with Roundtable members. On the other hand, Fox News is owned by Roundtable member Rupert Murdoch, and Fox relies heavily on advertising money from Roundtable members. Rupert Murdoch even supported Obama over McCain. As someone who monitors Fox News, I can’t recall the last time I heard Fox reporting on the activities of the Business Roundtable, not that any mainstream “news” companies do.
The list of similarities between the two, when it comes to exposing and holding the Economic Elite accountable, is extensive. So here you have an excellent divide-and-conquer psychological operation. Fox News declares Obama the enemy, and Obama declares Fox the enemy, yet the Economic Elite remain in the shadows, behind the scenes, untouched and continuing their plunder.
Just think of all the misplaced outraged spent on these two puppets. Sure, people have many reasons to like and dislike both, but imagine if all the diehard Obama-haters focused their rage on the people who put Obama in power, and if the diehard Fox-haters stopped criticizing everything Fox says and focused on the Economic Elite who control the media environment in which Fox News operates.
If the Fox-haters and the Obama-haters united and focused their combined outrage on the common forces behind the both of them, we would all be much better off.
The most significant bias in the mainstream media is not the liberal or conservative views propagated to divide, distract, confuse and create apathy among the populace; the ultimate bias is in what is missing from the coverage. The investigative reporting on the most powerful forces within our society is left out of the discussion.
McClatchy, one of the few real journalism news organizations, has repeatedly reported on the illegal activities of Goldman Sachs and the crime syndicate they operate in. Yet, an overwhelming majority of mainstream news outlets ignore these reports and nothing is done to hold Goldman Sachs accountable. In fact, two of the leading figures in the outright theft of our money have recently been lauded in their propaganda press. When you see Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke become thePerson of the Year in Time Magazine and Goldman Sachs CEO Llyod Blankfein become the Financial Times Man of the Year, you begin to see where the real media bias lies.
The main bias is in favor of the thieves who stole our country and economy, and own the mainstream media companies. The omni-present mainstream media is the greatest weapon of oppression humanity has ever known.
Although the Internet has had an impact, television news is still by far the most influential news medium. Despite all the new information platforms, this year we have set a new record by watching an average of four hours and 49 minutes of TV per day. We have been subjected to heavy doses of propaganda on a daily basis, for hours a day, every day of our lives.
The mainstream media creates what is known in mass psychology as the “spectrum of thinkable thought.” By constantly discussing and debating surface issues, they limit the range of debate. Having the Republican vs. Democrat paradigm leads us to never debating the underlying Economic Elite who control both of the parties, not to mention their ownership of the media platform on which this debate is taking shape. The more important underlying issues are never discussed, and therefore never enter public consciousness.
The censorship that is most prevalent today is the most dangerous form. Not the censorship of explicit words, sex, or violence, but the censorship of any thoughts outside of elite corporate ideology. Any debate that leads to critical thought on prevailing elite economic dominance is not allowed to enter into the mass media or mainstream public consciousness.
“We must conclude that a changeover is imminent and ineluctable in the co-opted caste who serve the interests of domination, and above all manage the protection of that domination. In such an affair, innovation will surely not be displayed [in the mainstream media]. It appears instead like lightning, which we know only when it strikes.” — Guy Debord, Comments on the Society of the Spectacle
June 8th, 2014 by olddog
By David DeGraw, AmpedStatus Report
“The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes… As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money powers of the country will endeavor to prolong it’s reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.” – Abraham Lincoln
U.S. Elite Institutions:
Business Round Table
Chamber of Commerce
Federal Trade Commission
Council on Foreign Relations
American Petroleum Institute
American Enterprise Institute
American Bankers Association
Pharm Research & Manufacturers
Public Relations Society of America
American Psychological Association
Project for a New American Century
Securities and Exchange Commission
Committee for Economic Development
National Association of Manufacturers
Carnegie / Ford / Rockefeller foundations
Military / Media / Prison Industrial Complex
I don’t view the Economic Elite as a small group of men who meet in secrecy to control the world. They do feature elements of conspiracy and are clearly composed of secretive organizations like the Bilderberg Group – this is not a conspiracy theory, this is a conspiracy fact – but as a whole the Economic Elite are primarily united by ideology. They’re made up of thousands of individuals who subscribe to an ideology of exploitation and the belief that wealth and resources need to be concentrated into the fewest hands possible (theirs), at the expense of the many.
That being said, there are some definite lead players in this group and it is important that we are not too vague and expose the individuals who publicly lead them. Focusing on the fundamental structure of the US economy, we have people like Hank Paulson, Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Alan Greenspan, Lloyd Blankfein, Jamie Dimon, John Mack, Vikram Pandit, John Thain, Hank Greenberg, Ken Lewis, John J. Castellani, Edward Yingling and Tom Donohue.
In total, the Economic Elite are made up of about 0.5% of the US population. At the center of this group is the Business Roundtable, an organization representing Fortune 500 CEOs that is also interlocked with several lead elite organizations. Most Americans have never heard of the Business Roundtable. However, in my analysis, it is the most influential and powerful Economic Elite organization.
“The Business Roundtable joined the Business Council at the heart of both the corporate community and the policy-formation network and now has the most powerful role…. The Roundtable’s interlocks with other policy groups and with think tanks are presented [below].” -– G. William Domhoff, Who Rules America?
The Roundtable’s first year of operation was 1972, which coincided with the beginning of the CEO salary explosion, and has been the driving force behind the unprecedented concentration of wealth since their inception. Their dominance over the US economy and government is unparalleled. Their members are a Who’s Who of everything that is wrong with our economy. Here is a partial list of some of their lead members:
——-Lloyd C. Blankfein, Goldman Sachs
——-James Dimon, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
——-James P. Gorman, Morgan Stanley
——-Vikram S. Pandit, Citigroup, Inc.
——-Brian T. Moynihan, Bank of America
——-Brendan McDonagh, HSBC
——-Robert W. Selander, MasterCard Incorporated
——-Kenneth I. Chenault, American Express Company
——-Rupert Murdoch, News Corporation
——-Glenn A. Britt, Time Warner Cable Inc.
——-Philippe Dauman, Viacom, Inc.
——-Jeffrey R. Immelt, General Electric Company
——-Brian L. Roberts, Comcast Corporation
——-Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft Corporation
——-John T. Chambers, Cisco Systems, Inc.
——-Randall L. Stephenson, AT&T Inc.
——-Ivan G. Seidenberg, Verizon Communications
——-David G. DeWalt, McAfee, Inc.
——-Steven R. Loranger, ITT Corporation
——-Paul T. Hanrahan, AES Corporation,
——-The Riley P. Bechtel, Bechtel Group, Inc.
——-W. James McNerney , Boeing Company,
——-The Rex W. Tillerson, Exxon Mobil Corporation
——-Marvin E. Odum, Shell Oil Company
——-John S. Watson, Chevron Corporation
——-James J. Mulva, ConocoPhillips
——-John B. Hess, Hess Corporation
——-James E. Rogers Duke Energy Corporation
——-J. Larry Nichols, Devon Energy Corporation
——-Ronald A. Williams, Aetna Inc.
——-David Cordani, CIGNA
——-Jeffrey B. Kindler , Pfizer Inc.
——-Angela F. Braly, WellPoint, Inc.
——-John C. Lechleiter, Eli Lilly and Company
——-Edward B. Rust, Jr., State Farm
——-Andrew N. Liveris, Dow Chemical
——-James W. Owens, Caterpillar Inc.
——-Ellen J. Kullman, DuPont
——-Edward E. Whitacre Jr., General Motors Company
——-Michael T. Duke, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
The Business Roundtable is the most powerful activist organization in the United States. Their leaders regularly lobby members of Congress behind closed doors and often meet privately with the President and his administration. Any legislation that affects Roundtable members has almost zero possibility of passing without their support.
For three major examples, look at healthcare and financial reform, along with the military budget. The healthcare reform bill devolved into what amounts to an insurance industry bailout and was drastically altered by Roundtable lobbyists representing interests like WellPoint, Aetna, Cigna, Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Johnson & Johnson. Obama and Congress are trying to please the Roundtable with a bill that supports their interests. This led to the dropping of the public-option put forth in the House bill. However, when it came to finishing the bill, Roundtable members began to walk away from the process.
That’s the real reason why the reform bill has stalled. Obama will be meeting with the Roundtable on February 24th, in hopes of getting healthcare reform back on track. After that meeting, he will then hold a bipartisan healthcare meeting with members of congress. Also being addressed in Obama’s upcoming meeting with the Roundtable are issues concerning financial reform. Almost every aspect of financial reform has been D.O.A. thanks to Roundtable lobbyists representing the interests of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Bank of America, HSBC, Master Card and American Express. They even pushed to make sure Ben Bernanke was reconfirmed as the head of the Federal Reserve and they have also guided Obama into focusing on deficit reduction, now that their member companies are healthy again and making record profits after receiving trillions in government subsidies.
The Roundtable played a pivotal role in the appointment of Hank Paulson, formerly the CEO of Roundtable member Goldman Sachs, who replaced Roundtable member John Snow as US Treasury Secretary. The Roundtable also strongly lobbied on behalf of current Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and White House National Economic Council Director Larry Summers. Although there has been recent talk of Geithner being replaced at the Treasury, the lead choice to replace him is Jamie Dimon, Roundtable member and CEO of JP Morgan Chase. The drastic rise in military spending is also a result of Roundtable lobbyists pushing the interests of large military companies like Boeing and Bechtel, along with the largest oil companies like ExxonMobil, Shell, Hess and Chevron.
The Roundtable tells politicians what they want done, and the politicians do it. At times, Roundtable members even write the laws themselves. On financial reform alone, those representing Wall Street firms gave “$42 million to lawmakers, mostly to members of the House and Senate banking committees and House and Senate leaders.” During the 2008 election cycle, they gave $155 million: $88 million to Democrats and $67 million to Republicans. Keep in mind, this is the spending on just their financial reform initiative. When it came to health reform, they gave even more.
When it comes to getting elected, over 90% of the time the candidate who simply spends more money on their campaign wins the election. The Roundtable and politicians recognize this fact, so the overwhelming majority of current elected officials relied heavily on campaign funding from Roundtable members, including President Obama.
Shortly after Obama’s inauguration he held a meeting with Roundtable members at the St. Regis Hotel. The president of the Business Roundtable is John J. Castellani. Throughout the first nine months of Obama’s presidency, Castellani met with him at the White House more than any other person, with the exception of Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue. If you look at the records of people who have spent the most time with Obama in the White House, other than these two, another frequent visitor is Edward Yingling, the president of the American Bankers Association.
These organizations – the Business Roundtable, Chamber of Commerce and the American Bankers Association – along with the Federal Reserve, a secretive quasi-government private institution, form the center of the Economic Elite’s power structure. Since the bailout, the Federal Reserve has been working closely with private firm BlackRock. Due to this relationship, BlackRock has emerged as the world’s largest money manager and now manages more assets than the Federal Reserve. They also “manage many of the Treasury Department’s big investments.
” On a global level, you have economic institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, and international treaties like NAFTA. These organizations already form a de facto world government that has rights beyond our constitutional rights and national sovereignty. If the WTO makes a ruling that goes against US law, the WTO ruling supersedes US law and wins out.
Here is how Global Exchange explains these global institutions: “The World Trade Organization is the most powerful legislative and judicial body in the world. By promoting the ‘free trade’ agenda of multinational corporations above the interests of local communities, working families, and the environment, the WTO has systematically undermined democracy around the world…. Unlike United Nations treaties, the International Labor Organization conventions, or multilateral environmental agreements, WTO rules can be enforced through sanctions. This gives the WTO more power than any other international body. The WTO’s authority even eclipses national governments.
[World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF)] When the Bank and the Fund lend money to debtor countries, the money comes with strings attached. These strings come in the form of policy prescriptions called ‘structural adjustment policies.’ These policies—or SAPs, as they are sometimes called—require debtor governments to open their economies to penetration by foreign corporations, allowing access to the country’s workers and environment at bargain basement prices. Structural adjustment policies mean across-the-board privatization of public utilities and publicly owned industries. They mean the slashing of government budgets, leading to cutbacks in spending on health care and education…. And, as their imposition in country after country in Latin America, Africa, and Asia has shown, they lead to deeper inequality and environmental destruction.
” In addition to dominating our political and economic system, the Economic Elite have already created their own private military. Their private military is now more powerful than the US military. As mentioned earlier, private mercenaries now outnumber US soldiers and receive the lion’s share of military spending.
Corporations like SAIC, Blackwater, Bechtel, Raytheon and Halliburton are composed of the most elite worldwide intelligence and military officers. These are the highly profitable and powerful entities that the Economic Elite turn to when national militaries and intelligence agencies – like the CIA, FBI or other government run entities – can’t get the job done.
For instance, SAIC, a “stealth company” that most people have never heard of, is considered to be the brains of the entire US intelligence apparatus, more powerful than the much more popularly known CIA, NSA and FBI – all agencies that SAIC is deeply intertwined with. I urge you to research SAIC to get a crash course in how the true power structure functions. You can start by reading an excellent investigative report by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele titled, “Washington’s $8 billion shadow.
” The Economic Elite dominate US intelligence and military operations. Other than the obvious geo-strategic reasons, the never-ending and ever-expanding War on Terror’s objective is to drain the US population of more resources and further rob US taxpayers, while using our tax money to create a private military that is more powerful than the US military.
I think any logical person can see the ominous implications of having such a vast and powerful private military and intelligence complex, created for and used, in secrecy, by the Economic Elite. Outside of the blatant economic policy attacks, heavily armed and sophisticated covert powers led by small groups of Economic Elite are now a serious risk and present danger.
In conclusion, these economic and government policy forming organizations, along with their private military and intelligence corporations, form the core of the Economic Elite power structure. “I think one has to say it’s not just simply a matter of capturing people and holding them accountable, but removing the sanctuaries, removing the support systems.” – Paul Wolfowitz Part IV: “The Financial Coup d’Etat” will be posted on Sunday. To be notified via email, subscribe to our newsletter here.
June 6th, 2014 by olddog
By Brandon Smith
On the surface, the economic atmosphere of the U.S. has appeared rather calm and uneventful. Stocks are up, employment isn’t great but jobs aren’t collapsing into the void (at least not openly), and the U.S. dollar seems to be going strong. Peel away the thin veneer, however, and a different financial horror show is revealed.
U.S. stocks have enjoyed unprecedented crash protection due to a steady infusion of fiat money from the Federal Reserve known as quantitative easing. With the advent of the “taper”, QE is now swiftly coming to a close (as is evident in the overall reduction in treasury market purchases), and is slated to end by this fall, if not sooner.
Employment has been boosted only in statistical presentation, and not in reality. The Labor Department’s creative accounting of job numbers omits numerous factors, the most important being the issue of long term unemployed. Millions of people who have been jobless for so long they no longer qualify for benefits are being removed from the rolls. This quiet catastrophe has the side bonus of making it appear as though unemployment is going down.
U.S. Treasury bonds, and by extension the dollar, have also stayed afloat due to the river of stimulus being introduced by the Federal Reserve. That same river, through QE, is now drying up.
In my article The Final Swindle Of Private American Wealth Has Begun, I outline the data which leads me to believe that the Fed taper is a deliberate action in preparation for an impending market collapse. The effectiveness of QE stimulus has a shelf-life, and that shelf life has come to an end. With debt monetization no longer a useful tool in propping up the ailing U.S. economy, central bankers are publicly stepping back. Why? If a collapse occurs while stimulus is in full swing, the Fed immediately takes full blame for the calamity, while being forced to admit that central banking as a concept serves absolutely no meaningful purpose.
My research over many years has led me to conclude that a collapse of the American system is not only expected by international financiers, but is in fact being engineered by them. The Fed is an entity created by globalists for globalists. These people have no loyalties to any one country or culture. Their only loyalties are to themselves and their private organizations.
While many people assume that the stimulus measures of the Fed are driven by a desire to save our economy and currency, I see instead a concerted program of destabilization which is meant to bring about the eventual demise of our nation’s fiscal infrastructure. What some might call “kicking the can down the road,” I call deliberately stretching the country thin over time, so that any indirect crisis can be used as a trigger event to bring the ceiling crashing down.
In the past several months, the Fed taper of QE and subsequently U.S. bond buying has coincided with steep declines in purchases by China, a dump of one-fifth of holdings by Russia, and an overall decline in new purchases of U.S. dollars for FOREX reserves.
With the Ukraine crisis now escalating to fever pitch, BRIC nations are openly discussing the probability of “de-dollarization” in international summits, and the ultimate dumping of the dollar as the world reserve currency.
The U.S. is in desperate need of a benefactor to purchase its ever rising debt and keep the system running. Strangely, a buyer with apparently bottomless pockets has arrived to pick up the slack that the Fed and the BRICS are leaving behind. But, who is this buyer?
At first glance, it appears to be the tiny nation of Belgium.
While foreign investment in the U.S. has sharply declined since March, Belgium has quickly become the third largest buyer of Treasury bonds, just behind China and Japan, purchasing more than $200 billion in securities in the past five months, adding to a total stash of around $340 billion. This development is rather bewildering, primarily because Belgium’s GDP as of 2012 was a miniscule $483 billion, meaning, Belgium has spent nearly the entirety of its yearly GDP on our debt.
Clearly, this is impossible, and someone, somewhere, is using Belgium as a proxy in order to prop up the U.S. But who?
Recently, a company based in Belgium called Euroclear has come forward claiming to be the culprit behind the massive purchases of American debt. Euroclear, though, is not a direct buyer. Instead, the bank is a facilitator, using what it calls a “collateral highway” to allow central banks and international banks to move vast amounts of securities around the world faster than ever before.
Euroclear claims to be an administrator for more than $24 trillion in worldwide assets and transactions, but these transactions are not initiated by the company itself. Euroclear is a middleman used by our secret buyer to quickly move U.S. Treasuries into various accounts without ever being identified. So the question remains, who is the true buyer?
My investigation into Euroclear found some interesting facts. Euroclear has financial relationships with more than 90 percent of the world’s central banks and was once partly owned and run by 120 of the largest financial institutions back when it was called the “Euroclear System”. The organization was consolidated and operated by none other than JP Morgan Bank in 1972. In 2000, Euroclear was officially incorporated and became its own entity. However, one must remember, once a JP Morgan bank, always a JP Morgan bank.
Another interesting fact – Euroclear also has a strong relationship with the Russian government and is a primary broker for Russian debt to foreign investors. This once again proves my ongoing point that Russia is tied to the global banking cabal as much as the United States. The East vs. West paradigm is a sham of the highest order.
Euroclear’s ties to the banking elite are obvious; however, we are still no closer to discovering the specific groups or institution responsible for buying up U.S. debt. I think that the use of Euroclear and Belgium may be a key in understanding this mystery.
Belgium is the political center of the EU, with more politicians, diplomats and lobbyists than Washington D.C. It is also, despite its size and economic weakness, a member of an exclusive economic club called the “Group Of Ten” (G10).
The G10 nations have all agreed to participate in a “General Arrangement to Borrow” (GAB) launched in 1962 by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The GAB is designed as an ever cycling fund which members pay into. In times of emergency, members can ask the IMF’s permission for a release of funds. If the IMF agrees, it then injects capital through Treasury purchases and SDR allocations. Essentially, the IMF takes our money, then gives it back to us in times of desperation (with strings attached). A similar program called ‘New Arrangements To Borrow’ (NAB) involves 38 member countries. This fund was boosted to approximately 370 billion SDR (or $575 billion dollars U.S.) as the derivatives crisis struck markets in 2008-2009. Without a full and independent audit of the IMF, however, it is impossible to know the exact funds it has at its disposal, or how many SDR’s it has created.
It should be noted the Bank of International Settlements is also an overseer of the G10. If you want to learn more about the darker nature of globalist groups like the IMF and the BIS, read my articles, Russia Is Dominated By Global Banks, Too, and False East/West Paradigm Hides The Rise Of Global Currency.
The following article from Harpers titled “Ruling The World Of Money,” was published in 1983 and boasts about the secrecy and “ingenuity” of the Bank Of International Settlements, an unaccountable body of financiers that dominates the very course of economic life around the world.
It is my belief that Belgium, as a member of the G10 and the GAB/NAB agreements, is being used as a proxy by the BIS and the IMF to purchase U.S. debt, but at a high price. I believe that the banking elite are hiding behind their middleman, Euroclear, because they do not want their purchases of Treasuries revealed too soon. I believe that the IMF in particular is accumulating U.S. debt to be used later as leverage to absorb the dollar and finalize the rise of their SDR currency basket as the world reserve standard.
Imagine what would happen if all foreign creditors abandoned U.S. debt purchases because the dollar was no longer seen as viable as a world reserve currency. Imagine that the Fed’s efforts to stimulate through fiat printing became useless in propping up Treasuries, serving only to devalue the domestic buying power of our currency. Imagine that the IMF swoops in as the lender of last resort; the only entity willing to service our debt and keep the system running. Imagine what kind of concessions America would have to make to a global loan shark like the IMF.
Keep in mind, the plan to replace the dollar is not mere “theory”. In fact, IMF head Christine Lagarde has openly called for a “global financial system” to take over in the place of the current dollar based system.
The Bretton Woods System, established in 1944, was used by the United Nations and participating governments to form international rules of economic conduct, including fixed rates for currencies and establishing the dollar as the monetary backbone. The IMF was created during this shift towards globalization as the BIS slithered into the background after its business dealings with the Nazis were exposed. It was the G10, backed by the IMF, that then signed the Smithsonian Agreement in 1971 which ended the Bretton Woods system of fixed currencies, as well as any remnants of the gold standard. This led to the floated currency system we have today, as well as the slow poison of monetary inflation which has now destroyed more than 98 percent of the dollar’s purchasing power.
I believe the next and final step in the banker program is to reestablish a new Bretton Woods style system in the wake of an engineered catastrophe. That is to say, we are about to go full circle. Perhaps Ukraine will be the cover event, or tensions in the South China Sea. Just as Bretton Woods was unveiled during World War II, Bretton Woods redux may be unveiled during World War III. In either case, the false East/West paradigm is the most useful ploy the elites have to bring about a controlled decline of the dollar.
The new system will reintroduce the concept of fixed currencies, but this time, all currencies will be fixed or “pegged” to the value of the SDR global basket. The IMF holds a global SDR summit every five years, and the next meeting is set for the beginning of 2015.
If the Chinese yuan is brought into the SDR basket next year, if the BRICS enter into a conjured economic war with the West, and if the dollar is toppled as the world reserve, there will be nothing left in terms of fiscal structure in the way of a global currency system. If the public does not remove the globalist edifice by force, the IMF and the BIS will then achieve their dream – the complete dissolution of economic sovereignty, and the acceptance by the masses of global financial governance. The elites don’t want to hide behind the curtain anymore. They want recognition. They want to be worshiped. And, it all begins with the secret buyout of America, the implosion of our debt markets, and the annihilation of our way of life.
You can contact Brandon Smith at: email@example.com
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
May 8th, 2014 by olddog
Despite popular belief, very few things in our world are exactly what they seem. That which is painted as righteous is often evil. That which is painted as kind is often malicious. That which is painted as simple is often complex. That which is painted as complex often ends up being disturbingly two dimensional. Regardless, if a person is willing to look only at the immediate surface of a thing, he will never understand the content of the thing.
This fact is nowhere more evident than in the growing “tensions” between the elites of the West and the elites of the East over the crisis in Ukraine.
I am continually astonished at the refusal of many otherwise intelligent people to consider the evidence or even the possibility that there is, in reality, no fundamental political or philosophical conflict between the power brokers of the East and the West. As I outlined in great detail in Russia Is Dominated By Global Banks, Too, the truth is they are both working toward the same goal; and both ultimately benefit from an engineered and theatrical display of international brinksmanship.
Russia, like the United States, is utterly beholden to globalist financiers through organizations like the International Monetary Fund and the Bank for International Settlements. Russia’s global economic adviser in matters ranging from investment image to privatization is none other thanGoldman Sachs.
Goldman Sachs has also worked closely with the Ukrainian government since 2011, and it started its advisory work with Ukraine for free. (Whenever Goldman Sachs does something for free, one should take special note.) Banking elites have been working both sides of the fence during the Russia versus Ukraine charade.
Russia has continued to borrow billions of dollars from Western banks, including Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse, year after year, proving that they are not averse in the slightest to working closely with "evil Western robber barons".
Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Mr. New-World-Order himself, Henry Kissinger, on a regular basis; and according to Putin’s press secretary, they are “old friends.” Putin’s meetings with Kissinger began almost immediately after he first took power in 2000.
Putin’s relationship with Kissinger has been so pronounced that the Russian Foreign Ministry gave Kissinger an honorary doctorate in diplomacy, and Putin placed Kissinger at the head of a bilateral “working group” — along with former KGB head and multilateralist (globalist) Gen. Yevgeny Primakov — dealing with foreign policy.
In more recent news, I would also remind pro-Putin cheerleaders that Putin and the Kremlin first pushed for the IMF to take control of the Ukrainian economy, and the IMF is now demanding that Ukraine fight Russia in exchange for financial support. This might seem like irony to more foolhardy observers; but to those who are aware of the false East/West paradigm, it is all the part of a greater plan for consolidation of power.
Clearly, Putin and Russia are just two more puppet pieces on the globalist chessboard, pitted against other puppets in the West in a grand theater designed to distract and divide the masses through chaos. As Kissinger points out, in crisis there is opportunity.
What is the goal? They’ve already told us, openly, on numerous occasions.
The first great prizes of the New World Order are a global currency and centralized economic control. The elites are not satisfied with quiet dominance of individual economies. They want complete political homogenization and the end of all sovereignty. Period. With a global currency in place, the steps towards global government become quick and small.
Heads of state from around the world, including Putin, as well as international bankers and IMF representatives have all publicly called for the IMF to take charge of the global economic system through its Special Drawing Rights currency program.
However, for the SDR to become a dominant currency, certain issues must be resolved. Here’s a short list.
The U.S. Dollar Must Fall
The dollar must lose its world reserve status, and most likely collapse in relative value, before the SDR can be elevated. This is where mainstream pundits lose track of the facts. For them, the dollar is an invincible monetary element, a currency product as infinite as time. Their normalcy bias prevents them from ever acknowledging the many weaknesses of the Federal Reserve note, including our country’s inability to ever service its more than $200 trillion debt. Others believe the dollar is the NWO currency, and that the globalists are somehow U.S.-centric. The evidence posted above suggests otherwise. Globalists have no loyalty to any nation or culture. Their only loyalty is to the progression of their own power. If sacrificing the dollar or the U.S. as a whole furthers that power, then they will have no problem cutting us loose like a rotting appendage.
A Liquidity Replacement Must Be Introduced
As my regular readers know, I have been covering China’s progression toward a decoupling from the U.S. economy for years. China, in my view, has always been the key to the elitist shift into a truly global currency mechanism. The primary argument in the mainstream against the idea of a dollar collapse is that there is no other currency with ample liquidity to take the dollar’s place. Well, in the past couple of years, this has changed.
China and the banks it controls have issued approximately $25 trillion in debt instruments and monetization. This is often referred to as a “debt bubble” created through panic and a weakness in China’s economy and a response to slowed quantitative easing in the United States. I would take a slightly different position. China began issuing Yuan denominated debt instruments in 2005, years before the mainstream had any inkling of the impending derivatives collapse. From then up to today, there has been no practical purpose for China to produce these Yuan denominated equities and securities, unless their target has always been to expand the Yuan market in a covert way.
I would say that China’s monetization has been carefully and deliberately engineered in order to lay the foundation for a massive liquidity spike in the Yuan. The argument that China’s incredible debt generation is a sign of impending collapse may be misguided. U.S. debt, including unfunded liabilities, absolutely dwarfs China’s $25 trillion. China's Yuan debt has barely had time to accrue concrete interest. The U.S., on the other hand, is caught in an endless cycle of interest payments that are slowly but surely eating away the skeleton of our fiscal structure. If any economy is on the verge of implosion, it is that of the United States, not of China.
The Chinese need exponential Yuan circulation. They do not want the Yuan to replace the dollar; instead, they are preparing it for induction into the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket. WithChina set to become the world largest economy this year according to World Bank, their inclusion is assured.
But, when might this occur?
The IMF holds an international conference and policy meeting on the SDR every five years. During these meetings, the IMF decides if it will absorb a new currency into the basket and if it will expand the creation or circulation of SDRs around the world. Interestingly, the next IMF conference on the SDR just happens to be scheduled for the end of 2014 to the beginning of 2015.
Another strange coincidence: The U.S. Congress was supposed to vote on legislation for further capital allocations to the IMF by April. The vote never came. The new allocations were to fund an expansion of IMF programs and help with the greater inclusion of BRIC nations in governing decisions. If the U.S. government does not pass this legislation, Russia and other nations have demanded that the IMF move forward without the United States on reforms. At the very least, the U.S. would lose its veto power over IMF decisions. I believe that the timing of this is deliberate, that the U.S. is meant to lose its veto power and that the simultaneous SDR conference will announce the inclusion of the Chinese Yuan, setting the stage for the replacement of the dollar as world reserve.
The SDR will not immediately be issued as a commonly traded currency itself. Rather, the IMF will take over management of included currencies and denominate those currencies using SDR valuations. For example, $1 U.S. is worth only .64 SDR today. In the near future, I expect that the dollar will plummet in relation to the SDR’s value. We will still have our greenbacks when the IMF begins administrating our currency system, but the international and domestic worth of those greenbacks will fall to pennies. In turn, other currencies with stronger economic positions will rise in worth relative to the SDR.
I believe one of the primary determinations in a currency’s value compared to the SDR will be a country’s stockpile of gold. This is why Russia and China in particular have been purchasing precious metals at an unheard-of rate (and why U.S. gold reserves have never been audited). The IMF itself is one of the world’s largest holders of physical gold, with nearly 3,000 metric tons (officially). With the crash of the dollar system and investors clamoring for a reliable hedge to protect whatever savings they have left, gold could conceivably skyrocket into the $5,000 to $10,000 per-ounce range. Governments holding the metal will be favorably placed during an implementation of the SDR as the new reserve standard.
A Cover Event Must Be Created
The centralization of power is best achieved during moments of bewildering calamity. The conjuring of crises is one of the oldest methods of elitist dominance. Not only can they confuse and frighten the masses into malleability, but they can also ride to the public’s rescue as heroes and saviors later on. The Hegelian dialectic is the mainstay of tyrants.
The destruction of the dollar and the institution of a global economic bureaucracy are not actions that can be executed openly by international financiers. These events will coincide with extreme catastrophe, likely worse than the Great Depression era, with millions upon millions of people losing the ability to financially support themselves and their families. Crime, death and public discontent will surely follow. People will be looking for someone to blame. This is where the false East/West paradigm comes in.
It is widely expected that as sanctions snowball between Russia and the U.S. that the dollar will end up on the chopping block. China has asserted its support for Russia in opposition to NATO interference in Ukraine. The stage has been set. I have warned for quite some time that the development of East/West tensions would be used as a cover for a collapse of the dollar system. I have warned that among the American media this collapse would be blamed on an Eastern dump of foreign exchange reserves and treasuries, resulting in a global domino-effect ending U.S. world reserve status. In turn, the international community would be conditioned to see this as the mere bumbling of a spoiled America gone power-mad, rather than the result of a covert program of economic destabilization. This might lead to all-out war or a fiscal firestorm that leaves much of the world crippled and desperate for aid.
In either case, the elitist plan is to use scapegoats and false enemies to draw our attention away from the real culprits: the international banks themselves. Make no mistake: This fight is not about President Barack Obama, it is not about Putin and it is not even about the Federal Reserve. These men are tools, errand boys, public mascots. Do not be fooled by the global stage play being perpetrated. Whatever happens in Ukraine and whatever happens between Russia, China and the West, there are only two real sides to this battle: the elitist establishment, and those who are smart enough to recognize their poison.
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.
May 1st, 2014 by olddog
Paul Craig Roberts
The US economy is a house of cards. Every aspect of it is fraudulent, and the illusion of recovery is created with fraudulent statistics.
American capitalism itself is an illusion. All financial markets are rigged. Massive liquidity poured into financial markets by the Federal Reserve’s Quantitative Easing inflates stock and bond prices and drives interest rates, which are supposed to be a measure of the cost of capital, to zero or negative, with the implication that capital is so abundant that its cost is zero and can be had for free. Large enterprises, such as mega-banks and auto manufacturers that go bankrupt are not permitted to fail. Instead, public debt and money creation are used to cover private losses and keep corporations “too big to fail” afloat at the expense not of shareholders but of people who do not own the shares of the corporations.
Profits are no longer a measure that social welfare is being served by capitalism’s efficient use of resources when profits are achieved by substituting cheaper foreign labor for domestic labor, with resultant decline in consumer purchasing power and rise in income and wealth inequality. In the 21st century, the era of jobs offshoring, the US has experienced an unprecedented explosion in income and wealth inequality. I have made reference to this hard evidence of the failure of capitalism to provide for the social welfare in the traditional economic sense in my book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism, and Thomas Piketty’s just published book, Capital in the 21st Century, has brought an alarming picture of reality to insouciant economists, such as Paul Krugman. As worrisome as Piketty’s picture is of inequality, I agree with Michael Hudson that the situation is worse than Piketty describes.http://michael-hudson.com/2014/04/pikettys-wealth-gap-wake-up/
Capitalism has been transformed by powerful private interests whose control over governments, courts, and regulatory agencies has turned capitalism into a looting mechanism. Wall Street no longer performs any positive function. Wall Street is a looting mechanism, a deadweight loss to society. Wall Street makes profits by front-running trades with fast computers, by selling fraudulent financial instruments that it is betting against as investment grade securities, by leveraging equity to unprecedented heights, making bets that cannot be covered, and by rigging all commodity markets.
The Federal Reserve and the US Treasury’s “Plunge Protection Team” aid the looting by supporting the stock market with purchases of stock futures, and protect the dollar from the extraordinary money-printing by selling naked shorts into the Comex gold futures market.
The US economy no longer is based on education, hard work, free market prices and the accountability that real free markets impose. Instead, the US economy is based on manipulation of prices, speculative control of commodities, support of the dollar by Washington’s puppet states, manipulated and falsified official statistics, propaganda from the financial media, and inertia by countries, such as Russia and China, who are directly harmed, both economically and politically, by the dollar payments system.
As the governments in most of the rest of the world are incompetent, Washington’s incompetence doesn’t stand out, and this is Washington’s salvation.
But it is not a salvation for Americans who live under Washington’s rule. As all statistical evidence makes completely clear, the share of income and wealth going to the bulk of the US population is declining. This decline means the end of the consumer market that has been the mainstay of the US economy. Now that the mega-rich have even more disproportionate shares of the income and wealth, what happens to an economy based on selling imports and off-shored production of goods and services to a domestic consumer market? How do the vast majority of Americans purchase more when their incomes have not grown for years and have even declined and they are too impoverished to borrow more from banks that won’t lend?
The America in which I grew up was self-sufficient. Foreign trade was a small part of the economy. When I was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, the US still had a trade surplus except for oil. Offshoring of America’s jobs had not begun, and US earnings on its foreign investments exceeded foreign earnings on US investments. Therefore, America’s earnings abroad covered its energy deficit in its balance of trade.
The economic stability achieved during the Reagan administration was shattered by Wall Street greed. Wall Street threatened corporations with takeovers if the corporations did not produce higher profits by relocating their production of goods and services for American markets abroad. The lower labor costs boosted earnings and stock prices and satisfied Wall Street’s cravings for ever more earnings, but brought an end to the rise in US living standards except for the mega-rich. Financial deregulation loaded the economy with the risks of asset bubbles.
Americans are an amazingly insouciant people. By now any other people would have burnt Wall Street to the ground.
Washington has unique subjects. Americans will take endless abuse and blame some outside government for their predicament–Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, China, Russia. Such an insouciant and passive people are ideal targets for looting, and their economy, hollowed-out by looting, is a house of cards.
ALL GOVERNMENTS RULE BY FORCE!
"No earthly government has jurisdiction over your God Given Rights."
“Educate and inform the whole mass of the people. They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.” -Thomas Jefferson.
AN INSOUCIANT NATION BECOMES A SLAVE NATION
April 28th, 2014 by olddog
By Danny Schechter
Global Research, April 25, 2014
For years, it was a term only used in connection with those big bad and sleazy Mafioso-type businessmen in Russia.
Russia had Oligarchs; we didn’t.
That became a big difference between the official narrative of what separated our land of the free and the home of the brave from THEM, the snakes in the shades and private planes, in the post-Soviet period.
Actually, I first heard the term oligarchy when I was studying labor history at Cornell a half a lifetime ago. We were taught about something called the “Iron Law of Oligarchy.”
It was a concept coined by Robert Michels, a friend of sociology guru, Max Weber, way back in 1911. Here’s how it was defined in that relic of another age: The Encyclopedia Britannica:
“Michels came to the conclusion that the formal organization of bureaucracies inevitably leads to oligarchy, under which organizations originally idealistic and democratic eventually come to be dominated by asmall, self-serving group of people who achieved positions of power and responsibility. This can occur in large organizations because it becomes physically impossible for everyone to get together every time a decision has to be made.”
So, oligarchies have been with us seemingly forever—it’s an “iron law,” says he– but in current usage the term references the small elite—the 1% of the 1% that dominates economic and political decision making.
Every body on the liberal left is now discovering information spelled out in a number of studies that caught the attention of Bill Moyers and his writing colleague Michael Winship. They discuss the way governments become partial to oligarchs and insure that the rich rule:
“Inequality is what has turned Washington into a protection racket for the one percent. It buys all those goodies from government: Tax breaks. Tax havens (which allow corporations and the rich to park their money in a no-tax zone). Loopholes. Favors like carried interest. And so on. As Paul Krugman writes in his New York Review of Books essay on Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century, “We now know both that the United States has a much more unequal distribution of income than other advanced countries and that much of this difference in outcomes can be attributed directly to government action.”
According to the AFL-CIO,” CEOs of major companies earn an average of 331 times more than their employees!” The NY Times reports America’s middle class is “no longer the world’s richest.”
Asking if democracy can “tame” plutocracy, Bob Borosage of the Campaign for America’s Future, cites another study:
“A recent exhaustive study by Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page found that elites got their way not often, but virtually all of the time (emphasis mine!) I guess the answer to his question re the possibility of “taming” plutocrats is, in the current moment, is a thundering NO.”
Even the barons of business news admit that wealth is concentrated as almost never before, Here’s Bloomberg:
”Just today, the world’s 200 richest people made $13.9 billion. In one single day, according to Bloomberg’s Billionaires Index… This is the Fed’s “wealth effect,” … It’s a construct that the Greenspan Fed conjured up out of thin air and presented to the incredulous American people as a valid economic theory. Bernanke then promoted it to the Fed’s stated raison d’être. His theory: if we immensely enrich during years of bailouts, money-printing, and interest rate repression the richest few thousand people in the world, everyone would be happy somehow.”
Adding critical fire power to this perspective, Eric Zuesse, cites the study to appear in the Fall 2014 issue of the academic journal Perspectives on Politics, that finds that “the U.S. is no democracy, but instead an oligarchy, meaning profoundly corrupt, so that the answer to the study’s opening question, “Who governs? Who really rules?” in this country, is:
“Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts…
When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.”
To put it short: The United States is no democracy, but actually an oligarchy.”
The underlying research for this study drew on “a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues.”
Much of this involves what economist Simon Johnston calls the “capture” of the state by corporate interests. He explains in a recent post: “Before 1939, wages and profits in the financial sector in the United States amounted to less than 1% of GDP; now they stand at 7-8% of GDP. In recent decades, financial assets have expanded dramatically relative to any measure of economic activity, as life expectancy increased and the post-WWII baby boomers began to think about saving for retirement. Compared to the size of the US economy, individual banks are now much bigger than they were in the early 1990’s.”
Sounds pretty frightening—and depressing.
None of us should be shocked by these findings. Last year I did a TV documentary series,Who Rules America based, in part, on the writings of C. Wight Mills on The Power Elite years ago and the detailed research by sociologist William Domhoff who forecast these trends.
As the economy changes, so does internal politics, as Tom Lodge observes in the case of South Africa:
“the degenerative changes that are observed within the ANC … appear to reflect a global trend in which mass parties are being replaced by electoral machines that depend less and less upon militant activism” and more on transactional exchanges between the electorate and the political elite. Amid these electoral limitations, what becomes the source of agency for ordinary people to instruct change in governance?”
What indeed? It behooves us to lobby our media to start reporting on the world as it is, not what it was, when today’s senior editors grew up, believing in the myths of American pluralism. And, now, disregarding who really has, and wields, power.
News Dissector Danny Schechter blogs at Newsdissector.net, and edits Mediachannel.org. His latest book is “When South Africa Called, We Answered, How Solidarity Helped Topple Apartheid. (2014). Comments to [email protected]
Copyright © 2014 Global Research
April 20th, 2014 by olddog
Received by email
Jan. 17 2013
TO THE EDITOR:
Republicans and “so called” conservatives are at it again. They are claiming that the Constitution gives people the right to have guns without the permission of the government. If that were true, then how could New York and Chicago have laws against it?
We Democrats are sick and tired of Republicans constantly using the Constitution to cover up their true plans, which are to make us all afraid of everyone else. Our great President came from a civilized part of the country where there is strict gun control, and he is only trying to bring the benefits of that more modern way of living to the rest of us.
I don’t know the exact statistics, but I’m quite certain the Chicago is a lot safer than Morehead City NC, when it comes to gun violence.
But do Republicans and Conservatives listen to the voice of reason? No, of course not! All they want to do is whine and complain about how gun control and wealth distribution violate the Constitution, as if the Constitution were all that great, anyway. There are a lot of things that need to be changed about the Constitution I’d say, and president Obama needs to change it.
The Republicans are just trying to stand in the way, because the President is Black. They even dared to question whether He was born in this country. I think that all this demonstrates that the Constitution needs to be amended when it comes to the qualifications for being President.
Right now it says that a person has to be thirty five years old, and to be a natural born citizen. Well that is obviously unfair because there are a great many otherwise qualified people who cannot run for President because their Mother had a C-section. But because the Constitution was written a hundred years ago, nobody even thought of the discrimination that would result from a Doctor having to deliver a baby in this unnatural way.
Now that we Democrats are in control of the government, that’s just one more thing we should change in order to make life fair.
Please withhold my name because I don’t want to receive crank calls.
Which-ever News Paper received this letter to the editor should have dispatched the funny farm cops to pick her/it/him up and take her/it/him to the psychiatric ward for a brain replacement. This is the classic dumbass attitude of government educated whacko’s who want everyone to be like them, and if they’re not, then force them to be. As for me and my house, we desire a separate government to live under, and preferably a different Continent. Stupidity is contagious! HAPPY EASTER FROM OLDDOG
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
April 18th, 2014 by olddog
Press TV does the lefty Hegelian dialectic routine for TPTB calling for dollar devaluation to "end the empire". Shorty Dawkins at Oath Keepers spotted this nonsense and made a great comment to O.K. readers as a teaching moment! You see why I've been complaining about Russia and China as patsies for dollar devaluation?
The following article is interesting in that what it says is basically true, but it is very telling in what it leaves out. It is curious to note that the article only quickly mentions the IMF. Is this because both Russia and China back the use of the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDR)? The article would have you believe there is a sharp division to be made between the US and its dollar supporters, and Russia and China – where, if you look closely, they are two sides of the same coin.
Shorty Dawkins, Associate Editor.
When a journalist as erudite as Yuram Weiler presents a meticulously surreptitious treatise on a subject as intricate as international banking, one can safely conclude it is an intentional attempt to obfuscate the crux of the matter. The world must be constantly informed of the Banking Cartels global control of all foreign and monitary policy. They must be eliminated, or the whole world will become destitute.
US military protecting international banking cartel
By Yuram Abdullah Weiler
“My assessment is that 90% of the value of the US dollar comes from the US military.”
Former Assistant Housing Secretary Catherine Austin Fitts
File photo shows a local branch of Bank of America.
‘Egypt’s judiciary system corrupt’
For decades, America has used its armed strength to enforce the use of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, effectively making the US military the armed wing of the international banking cartel (IBC). Since 1971 when President Richard Nixon stopped paying US debt obligations with gold, America has increasingly used its military might to prop up the value of the dollar and enforce a global financial structure whose primary beneficiary is the US itself, and whose central bank, the Federal Reserve, serves as the IBC’s supervisory authority.
Who or what is this IBC? It consists of Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Wells Fargo along with Deutsche Bank, BNP and Barclays. Eight families reportedly control the IBC: the Goldman Sachs, Rockefellers, Lehmans, Kuhn Loebs, Rothschilds, Warburgs, Lazards and the Israel Moses Seifs. Besides owning the US oil behemoths Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP and Chevron Texaco, IBC member institutions are among the top ten shareholders of nearly every Fortune 500 company. While the IBC itself has no formal status, nevertheless its members are represented by an international body, the Financial Stability Board (FSB). Organized as the Financial Security Forum in 1999 by G7 finance ministers and central bank governors, the FSB “seeks to give momentum to a broad-based multilateral agenda for strengthening financial systems and the stability of international financial markets.”
War is extremely profitable for the IBC, since not only do its members profit from financing arms sales to both sides during the conflicts that they themselves often initiate, but also from the post bellum reconstruction. In fact, the most powerful of the central banking institutions in the world, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), was established in 1930 to oversee reparation payments imposed upon Germany by the Treaty of Versailles that ended the First World War. In addition to providing banking services for central banks worldwide, the BIS supervised the Bretton Woods international currency agreements from the Second World War until the early 1970s, when Nixon reneged on pledges to pay US debt obligations in gold. The BIS also works with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to expand the IBC-imposed debt-dependency cycle among the nations of the world.
The methodology for global financial domination is really quite simple: America imports more goods than it exports and therefore dollars flow out of the US and accumulate in the central banks of other countries. Since the US has refused to honor these obligations in gold, the central banks are forced to invest in US treasury bills, bonds and other US financial instruments that pay interest which is financed by the issuance of further debt. The result is a US-dominated global financial system dependent upon maintaining the value, or more correctly, minimizing the rate of depreciation, of the dollar, allowing the US to enjoy an extravagant consumer-based economy at the expense of the rest of the world.
Regarding the insidious US debt-domination process, Wall Street analyst Michael Hudson explains that “by running balance-of-payments deficits that it refuses to settle in gold, it has obliged foreign governments to invest their surplus dollar holdings in Treasury bills, that is, to relend their dollar inflows to the US Treasury.” The system is somewhat self-perpetuating, for should a non-US central bank decide to divest its dollars, it would effectively sabotage the economy in its own country. Of course, foreign central banks and financial institutions are well aware that by investing in US treasury securities, they will lose money since the Federal Reserve will only turn around and “print” more dollars, thus further diluting the value of their reserves. However, if these foreign institutions would fail to reinvest their dollars in more T-bills, the rate of depreciation of their dollar holdings would accelerate dramatically. Such awareness holds most governments in check, preventing wholesale dumping of dollars, which of course would bring the entire global system down, along with the IBC.
Hence, demand for US dollars and government and agency bonds continues even as [dollar] value falls. The losses on these holdings represent a tax paid to the ‘Empire’,” writes Catherine Austin Fitts, adding, “The fundamental system is as old as the hills. It is based on force.” Conversely, this ability of the IBC to call upon the US military, which incidentally consumes 40 percent of global military spending, whenever and wherever the cartel’s interests are threatened, results directly from the global dominance of the dollar. India-based scholar and social activist Rohini Hensm writes, “It is the dominance of the dollar that underpins US financial dominance as a whole as well as the apparently limitless spending power that allows it to keep hundreds of thousands of troops stationed all over the world.” In short, dollar dominance allows the obscenely profligate spending to maintain the US military’s global presence, which in turn insures the continuing hegemony of the dollar.
Nevertheless, an increasing number of challenges to this dollar hegemony regime has arisen, some of which have necessitated suppression by the US military. Iraq is a good case in point. In November of 2000, former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein announced to the world that Iraq would no longer accept dollars for petroleum transactions. Despite the declining value of the Euro, Saddam demanded payment for Iraqi oil in the troubled currency while declaring dollars to be “the currency of the enemy.” By 2002, Iraqi oil was being traded in Euros, effectively dumping the dollar. Former US President George W. Bush, who was a deputy of the IBC from the oil industry, used the 9/11 terrorist attacks as a convenient excuse to invade Iraq in March 2003, thus eliminating Saddam’s threat to dollar domination.
When former Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi tried to establish a state-run central bank and trade petroleum in non-dollar currencies, the IBC tapped NATO to intervene. On March 19, 2011, a mere month after initial internal unrest, the Transitional National Council “rebels” announced they were establishing the Libyan Oil Company as the supervisory authority on oil production and policies, and designated the Central Bank of Benghazi as the authority for monetary policies. That a local group of rebels one month into a rebellion would form a national oil company and designate a private central bank astounded Robert Wenzel of the Economic Policy Journal who remarked, “I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising.” Confirming suspicions of IBC involvement, the US Treasury placed sanctions on Qaddafi’s National Oil Corporation, but assured the rebels, “Should National Oil Corporation subsidiaries or facilities come under different ownership and control, Treasury may consider authorizing dealings with such entities.”
Other countries have had enough of the IBC and its armed wing. Both Russia and China have expressed their distaste for the dollar status quo and US threats of sanctions or military force. On Thursday, Sept. 6, 2012, China announced that any nation in the world that wishes to buy, sell, or trade crude oil can do using the Chinese currency, not the American dollar. Following suit the next day, Russia announced that it would sell China all the crude oil it wanted but it would not accept US dollars. In addition, Russia has recently unveiled a payment system, called the PRO 100 Universal electronic card, designed to bypass the IBC should it again decide to block credit card services to Russian banks. “There is little doubt in my mind but that Russia and China and no doubt many other countries around the world are getting angry as hell about the US abusing its foreign currency privilege,” wrote investment banker Jay Taylor.
Iran, of course, has long been targeted by the IBC for refusing to surrender to US-imposed sanctions and threats of military force. Iran had completely eliminated the use of US dollars for oil trading by December 2007 and inaugurated its Bourse (stock exchange) for trading petroleum in non-dollar currencies in February 2008, coinciding with the 29th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution. Additionally, the IBC has tried to cut off Iran from using SWIFT, Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications, for international transactions. However, with the world's second-largest gas reserves and third-largest oil reserves, Iran retains the potential to strike a major blow against US dollar hegemony.
The question is how can we put an end to this stranglehold on the global financial system by the IBC and its armed wing? Hensm gives us a simple, straightforward answer: “Destroy US dollar hegemony, and the ‘Empire’ will collapse.” If more nations join Iran, Russia and China, and opt out of the US dollar protection racket, then this evil “Empire” will surely collapse along with its armed wing.
Yuram Abdullah Weiler is a freelance writer and political critic who has written dozens of articles on the Middle East and US policy. A former engineer with a background in mathematics and a convert to Islam, he currently writes perspectives on Islam, social justice, economics and politics from the viewpoint of an American convert to Shia Islam, focusing on the deleterious role played by the US in the Middle East and elsewhere. A dissenting voice from the “Belly of the Beast”, he lives with his wife in Denver, Colorado.
More articles by Yuram Abdullah Weiler
April 16th, 2014 by olddog
All of a sudden the government lays claims to your savings. They can't prove you owe them a dime, but you're deprived due process. The legal bills become overwhelming, and so you let your money be stolen. You simply have no choice.
Sound outlandish? It's not. Not in the "Land of the Free" at least.
For example, the US government began intercepting Mary Grice's tax refunds without any warning this tax season. Grice was unaware of the situation until she got a letter stating that her refund had gone to satisfy old debt to the government. Very old debt…In fact, debt she didn't even know about.
That debt stems back to 1960, when Grice was 4, around the time her father died, leaving her mother with five children to raise. Until the kids turned 18, her mother Sadie Grice got survivor benefits from Social Security to help feed and clothe them. But, according to Social Security, something went awry.
Social Security now claims it overpaid someone in the Grice family – though it is not sure whom – in 1977. After 37 years of silence, four years after Sadie Grice died, the government is coming after the daughter. She is not the only one.
Hundreds of thousands of taxpayers will receive letters like the one Grice got. Because of some unknown debt they never even knew about, that might not have anything to do with them, the government is confiscating their money. They won't have their day in court, in most cases, because they don't have the money to fight.
Already in 2014, the US Treasury Department has "intercepted" $1.9 billion in tax refunds, $75 million of which has been delinquent for more than ten years. The effort to collect old debts was ratcheted up in the last three years, the result of a sentence tucked into the farm bill lifting the 10-year statute of limitations on old debts to Uncle Sam. Social Security, the Treasury Department and Congress have all denied seeking the change. Why now?
“We have an obligation to current and future Social Security beneficiaries to attempt to recoup money that people received when it was not due," says Social Security spokeswoman Dorothy Clark.
Since the effort to collect old debts began in 2011, the Treasury Department has collected $424 million in debts that were over 10 years old. The Social Security Administration has found 400,000 taxpayers who collectively owe $714 million on debts over 10 years old. The agency expects to have begun proceedings against all of those people by the summer.
“It was a shock,” said Grice, 58. “What incenses me is the way they went about this. They gave me no notice, they can’t prove that I received any overpayment, and they use intimidation tactics, threatening to report this to the credit bureaus.”
Grice filed a suit against the Social Security Administration alleging they violated her right to due process by holding her responsible for the $2,996 debt supposedly incurred under her father's Social Security number. On its website, The Federal Trade Commission states “family members typically are not obligated to pay the debts of a deceased relative from their own assets.”
But Social Security sees it differently. If a child indirectly receives funds from public money paid to the parent, the children's money is fair game.
“The craziest part of this whole thing is the way the government seizes a child’s money to satisfy a debt that child never even knew about,” says Robert Vogel, Grice’s attorney. “They’ll say that somebody got paid for that child’s benefit, but the child had no control over the money and there’s no way to know if the parent ever used the money for the benefit of that kid…Can the government really bring back to life a case that was long dead? Can it really be right to seize a child’s money to satisfy a parent’s debt?”
Although Grice has a lawyer, most taxpayers whose refunds have been taken say they are unable to contest the confiscations because of the cost.
The Treasury initially held the full amount of Grice’s federal and state refunds, a total of $4,462. Last week, after The Washington Post inquired about Grice’s case, and then the government returned the part of her refund above the $2,996 owed on her father’s account.
But unless the feds can prove that she ever received any of the overpayment, Grice wants all of her money back.
“Look, I love a good fight, especially for principle,” she said. “My mom used to say, ‘This country is carried on the backs of the little people,’ and now I see what she meant. This is really sad.”
Does one need more evidence that the federal government is bankrupt? It's grasping at every last penny it can get by inserting legislation deep inside bills that the House of Representatives doesn't even read. One sentence is all that is needed for your savings to be confiscated. But don't worry, it is all to pay down a trifling US government debt:
Of the hundreds of thousands who have claims by the Treasury or Social(ist) (In)Security against them only 10% win their cases and are absolved of forking over money. There is nothing you can do about bureaucracy once bureaucracy decides to come after you. In the future there will only be more of the same as government agencies seize funds, including the nationalization of IRAs and pensions.
The best way to protect yourself is to get your funds and assets outside of the US preferably not even in your personal name. That is where The TDV Wealth Management Conference comes in. Only here will you learn the ins-and-outs of the new American system, and the options available to you, as an American, at the end of empire. Don't miss out.
Click here to join the discussion at The Dollar Vigilante.
Anarcho-Capitalist. Libertarian. Freedom fighter against mankind’s two biggest enemies, the State and the Central Banks. Jeff Berwick is the founder of The Dollar Vigilante, CEO of TDV Media & Services and host of the popular video podcast, Anarchast. Jeff is a prominent speaker at many of the world’s freedom, investment and gold conferences as well as regularly in the media including CNBC, CNN and Fox Business.
April 15th, 2014 by olddog
By Mark Owen
There are two Crowns operant in England, one being Queen Elizabeth II.
Although extremely wealthy, the Queen functions largely in a ceremonial capacity and serves to deflect attention away from the other Crown, who issues her marching orders through their control of the English Parliament.
This other Crown is comprised of a committee of 12 banks headed by the Bank of England (House of Rothschild). They rule the world from the 677-acre, independent sovereign state know as The City of London, or simply 'The City.'
The City is not a part of England, just as Washington, D.C. is not a part of the USA.
The City is referred to as the wealthiest square mile on earth and is presided over by a Lord Mayor who is appointed annually.
When the Queen wishes to conduct business within the City, she is met by the Lord Mayor at Temple (Templar) Bar where she requests permission to enter this private, sovereign state. She then proceeds into the City walking several paces behind the Mayor.
Her entourage may not be clothed in anything other than service uniforms.
In the nineteenth century, 90% of the world's trade was carried by British ships controlled by the Crown. The other 10% of ships had to pay commissions to the Crown simply for the privilege of using the world's oceans.
The Crown reaped billions in profits while operating under the protection of the British armed forces. This was not British commerce or British wealth, but the Crown's commerce and the Crown's wealth.
As of 1850, author Frederick Morton estimated the Rothschild fortune to be in excess of $10 billion [today, the combined wealth of the banking dynasties is $300 trillion]. Today, the bonded indebtedness of the world is held by the Crown.
The aforementioned Temple Bar is the juristic arm of the Crown and holds an exclusive monopoly on global legal fraud through their Bar Association franchises. The Temple Bar is comprised of four Inns of Court. They are, the Middle Temple, Inner Temple, Lincoln's Inn and Gray's Inn. The entry point to these closed secret societies is only to be found when one is called to their Bar.
The Bar attorneys in the United States owe their allegiance and pledge their oaths to the Crown. All Bar Associations throughout the world are signatories and franchises to the International Bar Association located at the Inns of Court of the Crown Temple.
The Inner Temple holds the legal system franchise by license that bleeds Canada and Great Britain dry, while the Middle Temple has license to steal from America.
To have the Declaration of Independence recognized internationally, Middle Templar King George III agreed in the Treaty of Paris of 1783 to establish the legal Crown entity of the incorporated United States, referred to internally as the Crown Temple States (Colonies). States spelled with a capital letter 'S,' denotes a legal entity of the Crown.
At least five Templar Bar Attorneys under solemn oath to the Crown, signed the American Declaration of Independence. This means that both parties were agents of the Crown. There is no lawful effect when a party signs as both the first and second parties. The Declaration was simply an internal memo circulating among private members of the Crown.
Most Americans believe that they own their own land, but they have merely purchased real estate by contract. Upon fulfillment of the contract, control of the land is transferred by Warranty Deed. The Warranty Deed is only a 'color of title.' Color of Title is a semblance or appearance of title, but not title in fact or in law. The Warranty Deed cannot stand against the Land Patent.
The Crown was granted Land Patents in North America by the King of England. Colonials rebelled at the usurious Crown taxes, and thus the Declaration of Independence was created to pacify the poplulace.
Another ruse used to hoodwink natural persons is by enfranchisement. Those cards in your wallet bearing your name spelled in all capital letters means that you have been enfranchised and have the status of a corporation. A 'juristic personality' has been created, and you have entered into multi-variant agreements that place you in an equity relationship with the Crown.
These invisible contracts include, birth certificates, citizenship records, employment agreements, driver's licenses and bank accounts. It is perhaps helpful to note here that contracts do not now, nor have they ever had to be stated in writing in order to be enforceable by American judges. If it is written down, it is merely a written statement of the contract.
Tax protestors and (the coming) draft resistors trying to renounce the parts of these contracts that they now disagree with will not profit by resorting to tort law (fairness) arguments as justification. Judges will reject these lines of defense as they have no bearing on contract law jurisprudence. Tort law governs grievances where no contract law is in effect.
These private agreements/contracts that bind us will always overrule the broad general clauses of the Constitution and Bill of Rights (the Constitution being essentially a renamed enactment of English common law). The Bill of Rights is viewed by the Crown as a 'bill of benefits,' conferred on us by them in anticipation of reciprocity (taxes).
Protestors and resistors will also lose their cases by boasting of citizenship status. Citizenship is another equity agreement that we have with the Crown. And this is the very juristic contract that Federal judges will use to incarcerate them. In the words of former Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, "Equity is brutal, but we are merely enforcing agreements." The balance of Title 42, section 1981 of the Civil Rights Code states, " .citizens shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind"
What we view as citizenship, the Crown views as a juristic enrichment instrumentality. It also should be borne in mind that even cursory circulation or commercial use of Federal Reserve Notes effects an attachment of liability for the payment of the Crown's debt to the FED. This is measured by your taxable income.
And to facilitate future asset-stripping, the end of the 14th
amendment includes a state of debt hypothecation of the United States, wherein all enfranchised persons (that's you) can be held personally liable for the Crown's debt.
The Crown views our participation in these contracts of commercial equity as being voluntary and that any gain accrued is taxable, as the gain wouldn't have been possible were in not for the Crown. They view the system of interstate banks as their own property. Any profit or gain experienced by anyone with a bank account (or loan, mortgage or credit card) carries with it – as an operation of law – the identical same full force and effect as if the Crown had created the gain.
Bank accounts fall outside the umbrella of Fourth Amendment protection because a commercial contract is in effect and the Bill of Rights cannot be held to interfere with the execution of commercial contracts. The Crown also views bank account records as their own private property, pursuant to the bank contract that each of us signed and that none of us ever read.
The rare individual who actually reads the bank contract will find that they agreed to be bound by Title 26 and under section 7202 agreed not to disseminate any fraudulent tax advice. This written contract with the Crown also acknowledges that bank notes are taxable instruments of commerce.
When we initially opened a bank account, another juristic personality was created. It is this personality (income and assets) that IRS agents are excising back to the Crown through taxation.
A lot of ink is being spilled currently over Social Security.
Possession of a Social Security Number is known in the Crown's lex as 'conclusive evidence' of our having accepted federal commercial benefits. This is another example of an equity relationship with the Crown. Presenting one's Social Security Number to an employer seals our status as taxpayers, and gives rise to liability for a reciprocal quid pro quo payment of taxes to the Crown.
Through the Social Security Number we are accepting future retirement endowment benefits. Social Security is a strange animal. If you die, your spouse gets nothing, but rather, what would have gone to you is divided (forfeited) among other premium payers who haven't died yet.
But the Crown views failure to reciprocate in any of these equity attachments as an act of defilement and will proceed against us with all due prejudice.
For a person to escape the tentacles of the Crown octopus, a thoroughgoing study of American jurisprudence is required. One would have to be deemed a 'stranger to the public trust,' forfeit all enfranchisement benefits and close all bank accounts, among other things.
Citizenship would have to be made null and forfeit and the status of 'denizen' enacted. If there are any persons extant who have passed through this fire, I would certainly appreciate hearing from them.
April 12th, 2014 by olddog
All the attention over the vote by Crimeans to leave the Ukraine makes for a timely review of other separatist factions that are seeking a similar resolution. The list of active separatist movements in Europe is exhaustive.
The immediate impression is that a pervasive discontent, shared by legions of subjects, who want independence and self-determination, will be hard to derail. When European autocratic and aristocrats ruled, the only option was revolution. Today the descendants of the old regimes still wield power under the guise of democratically elected authorities. However, separatist sentiment does not mean the same to every splinter group.
Examine Europe's Latest Secession Movement: Venice, for a telling indicator.
An organization representing a coalition of Venetian nationalist groups, held an unofficial referendum on breaking with Rome. Voters were first asked the main question -"Do you want Veneto to become an independent and sovereign federal republic?" -followed by three sub-questions on membership in the European Union, NATO, and the eurozone . . .
As the referendum's organizers announced the results: 2,102,969 votes in favor of independence—a whopping 89 percent of all ballots cast—to 257,266 votes against. Venetians also said yes to joining NATO, the EU, and the eurozone.
Note the significance of wanting to be part of NATO and the EU.
Next, look at the more widely reported effort, in the land of "Braveheart" William Wallace. Scottish secession remains unlikely, but momentum is with the schismatics provides a more stately viewpoint from the Commonwealth.
After months of comfort for the pro-unionist ‘Better Together’ campaign, the most recent polls point to a tighter race with 40 percent of Scots supporting secession. With six months to go, the momentum appears to be with those seeking an amicable divorce.
Scottish independence would not lead to a republic. Queen Elizabeth II (I of Scotland) would remain head of state, a smart move by the ‘Yes’ campaign to de-radicalize independence and make the electorate feel more comfortable with a vote for change. The debate has therefore become more focused on incrementalism, with plans for an independent Scotland retaining both membership of NATO and the European Union, a common currency with the rest of the UK, and open borders.
A video from the Carnegie Council gives a spin in Which Separatist Movements Will Succeed, which plays down the urgent motivation for "FREEDOM" for an evolutionary approach.
An essay out of Wharton, Is Secession the Answer? The Case of Catalonia, Flanders and Scotland, points out the obvious, while illustrating the problematic.
It may seem paradoxical in an age of global communications, but the revival of regionalism "is a global phenomenon," notes Jacob Funk Kierkegaard, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington, D.C. think tank. Today’s high-speed technologies, including the Internet, "enable people to start a campaign and get out their message" quickly and repeatedly to like-minded people who might have harbored such desires in private.
Beyond its unique constitutional challenges, Catalonia faces another hurdle: The eurozone has a de facto veto over its independence. "If Catalonia becomes independent, will they [still] be part of the eurozone?" Kierkegaard asks, adding that, if Catalonia votes to secede, the EU response could be that "you will have to issue your own currency, and your banks will have no access to the European Central Bank. You won’t automatically have a seat on the ECB governing council.
In the Spanish situation, by contrast, the establishment would have you believe the militant Basques ETA nationalists harbor violent resolve. The YouTube Thousands March In Spain In Support Of ETA, reports that the EU labels this movement as terrorists. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the Catalan Sovereignty Claim Blocked by Spain Constitutional Court, is but a spillover effort to discredit Catalonia’s claim. "Sovereignty is "not contemplated in our constitution for nationalities and regions that make up the state" and no one can break the principle of the "indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation," the ruling said.
Such illustrations all exhibit unique local concerns and grievances, while sharing a basic distrust of national authority. What stands out is an anserine eagerness to remain part of the EU and NATO. This factor may be a distinctively European trait, which seems to be lacking in the proper understanding that the surrender of national authority to a body of central banksters, social technocrats and empire military mercenaries is the fundamental cause of popular dissatisfaction.
Pat Buchanan in the article, Is Red State America Seceding?, provides numerous other European examples of discontent, then goes on to cite secession initiatives in the United States. It is striking that our country's unique experience has a shape difference from the blue-blooded patricians’ clashes that mark the history of Europe. Because of this difference, the indigenous cultures on the continent have never developed the same passion for individual liberty, which is inborn in the American revolutionary spirit.
Applying the same principles defended in the View from the Mount essay, Secession Movement Ready to Take Hold, would serve our European cousins well, in breaking up the EU and their NWO oppression.
Governments fall, while a consensual nation state can still survive. With the destruction of an accepted traditionalistic national identity, time-honored heritage becomes the target of dictatorial "do gooders" who facilitate subjugation of independent self-governing states.
Blowing out the candles of federal absolutism is the imperative of our age. Secession is not a dirty word, but is an indispensable solution. Dissolving the union of the suppressed, under the auspices of the subverted elite, is the path to social freedom and human liberty.
Libertarian and author L. Neil Smith argues, "What happened in America in the 1860s was a war of secession, a war of independence, no different in principle from what happened in America in the 1770s and 1780s." Compare most of the secession movements in the 21th century as half measure efforts that are not willing to take on the yoke of the globalist central banking financial system. The lessons presented in the Radical Reactionary article, Representation, Secession and Taxation, should be applied and adopted by the European secession movements.
As discontent rises and practical solutions evaporate, that dirty historic sentiment begins to bubble to the surface, SECESSION. Russell D. Longcore provides a standard, when secession is a vital and justified option that many would accept.
Secession should be solemnly deliberated by the elected representatives and the state citizens. Secession should be initiated at the moment that any state reaches the point at which it will no longer accept the despotic tyranny and laws coming from the US Federal Government in Washington, DC. Or, secession should be initiated upon a collapse of the Dollar, or the imposition by Washington DC of martial law in the event of social upheaval.
Discontent is not enough to overthrow the tyrants, who have definitively proven, that a European Union based upon top down authoritarianism is a lawful substitute for locally ruled government based upon common ethics and cultural heritage.
The dramatic rise in opposition to the ruling elites is most encouraging in the eternal struggle against despotism. However, the European socialist welfare model has produced generations of soft stock and irresponsible subjects. Surrendering national sovereignty was the monumental failure of the post-war era. Open borders to a confederation of dissimilar ethnic groups, attracts the disparate and incongruent, which builds even more pressure for secession.
As it stands today, the prospects for successful secession movements to attain their independence and autonomy are slim because each are fragmented. The correct and necessary element for separation, must be based upon the dissolution of the European Union and the elimination of the central banking system under the control of the international banksters.
Countries need to exercise their proper authority to coin their own currencies and maintain low taxation levels that fund minimum governmental functions.
While such a goal and objective is justified, the globalist controllers will not allow a serene exit from the monolith that they created. Marginal regional self-rule may eventually be reluctantly recognized, only if the basic leviathan structure remain intact and accepted by disgruntled camps. Notwithstanding, that approach can and will never bring about a restoration of national self-determination.
It is time for secession movements to unite and coalesce around a few fundamental principles, which they all share. The regional concerns are issues for local administration. Taking on the monster of globalist governance is a universal task.
Consequently, the undertaking domestically is to build groundswell defiance that moves past a modest grassroots opposition to incorporate the bulk of the rapidly declining middle class. This genuine moral majority must be willing to marginalize the federal government and restore the rightful authority of individual state jurisdiction.
If timid and docile Europeans are engaging in secession movements in such significant numbers, what is the excuse for industrious and energetic Americans from doing the same? This was the country for the home of the brave. Now is the time to restore that outlook with direct action.
Original article archived here
SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit's formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. SARTRE is the publisher of BREAKING ALL THE RULES. Contact email@example.com
You Might Also Like
The Hornets’ Nest of Vaccine Information
5 Warning Signs That Cancer Is Starting in Your Body
4 Hormones All Skinny People Have In Balance
DNA Nanobots Enter Living Organism For First Time – Human Trials Within 5 Years?
#1 WORST food for digestion (are you eating it?)
14 Embarrassing Sex Questions
Testosterone Booster Takes GNC By Storm
A 101 Year Old Marathon Runner Shares His Secret To Limitless Energy
April 11th, 2014 by olddog
In my last article regarding the history and science of color revolutions, I attempted to demonstrate how the science of using mass movements of “swarming adolescents” to destabilize national governments and implement regime change is actually a well-established instrument of imperialist desires. In addition, the previous article also demonstrated the methodology of this type of attack in terms of the means of deployment and necessary components of the color revolution.
Yet, if one were to desire a case study in the art of color revolution and destabilization, then the case of Milosevic’s Serbia could easily be provided.
Indeed, Michael Dobbs of the Washington Post wrote an article in 2000 entitled, “U.S. Advice Guided Milosevic Opposition: Political Consultants Helped Yugoslav Opposition Topple Authoritarian Leader,” where he peripherally outlined the tactics used by the United States and NGOs in order to accomplish the desired regime change and the weakening of yet another target nation. This successful destabilization resulted in what Mowat deems in his excellent article “A New Gladio In Action,” “The Serbian Virus,” a domino effect of color revolutions in the Eastern European and Slavic countries. Dobbs wrote,
U.S.-funded consultants played a crucial role behind the scenes in virtually every facet of the anti-Milosevic drive, running tracking polls, training thousands of opposition activists and helping to organize a vitally important parallel vote count. U.S. taxpayers paid for 5,000 cans of spray paint used by student activists to scrawl anti-Milosevic graffiti on walls across Serbia, and 2.5 million stickers with the slogan "He's Finished," which became the revolution's catchphrase.
Some Americans involved in the anti-Milosevic effort said they were aware of CIA activity at the fringes of the campaign, but had trouble finding out what the agency was up to. Whatever it was, they concluded it was not particularly effective. The lead role was taken by the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, the government's foreign assistance agency, which channeled the funds through commercial contractors and nonprofit groups such as NDI and its Republican counterpart, the International Republican Institute (IRI).
While NDI worked closely with Serbian opposition parties, IRI focused its attention on Otpor, which served as the revolution's ideological and organizational backbone. In March, IRI paid for two dozen Otpor leaders to attend a seminar on nonviolent resistance at the Hilton Hotel in Budapest a few hundreds yards along the Danube from the NDI-favored Marriott.
During the seminar, the Serbian students received training in such matters as how to organize a strike, how to communicate with symbols, how to overcome fear and how to undermine the authority of a dictatorial regime. The principal lecturer was retired U.S. Army Col. Robert Helvey, who has made a study of nonviolent resistance methods around the world, including those used in modern-day Burma and the civil rights struggle in the American South.
Those readers familiar with the methods used to deploy a successful color revolution will immediately recognize three aspects of Dobbs’ statement. First, the fact that U.S. organizations funded many of the activists directly and/or paid for supplies needed for guerrilla and overt activism on the ground. Second, that there was the clear existence of a parallel vote counting and reporting apparatus and, third, the involvement of individuals like Col. Robert Helvey.
Jonathan Mowat picks up the topic, particularly that of Helvey’s involvement and summarily documents the rest of the Serbian story in his own article by writing,
Helvey, who served two tours in Vietnam, introduced the Otpor activists to the ideas of American theoretician Gene Sharp, whom he describes as "the Clausewitz of the nonviolence movement," referring to the renowned Prussian military strategist.
Peter Ackerman, the above-mentioned [in his own article] coup expert, analyzed and popularized the methods involved in a 2001 PBS documentary-series and book, "A Force More Powerful: A Century of Nonviolent Conflict," together with retired US Airforce officer Jack DuVall. Focusing on youth organizing, they report:
After the NATO bombing, which had helped the regime suppress opposition, Otpor's organizing took hold with a quiet vengeance. It was built in some places around clubhouses where young people could go and hang out, exercise, and party on the weekends, or more often it was run out of dining rooms and bedrooms in activists' homes. These were "boys and girls 18 and 19 years old" who had lived "in absolute poverty compared to other teenagers around the world," according to Stanko Lazendic, an Otpor activist in Novi Sad. "Otpor offered these kids a place to gather, a place where they could express their creative ideas." In a word, it showed them how to empower themselves.
In addition, Otpor offered food, shelter, and entertainment to a portion of the population that was suffering from a tragic lack of those things. Otpor, as a heavily-funded organization, was thus able to gain the trust and allegiance – conditional as it may have been – of a substantial number of young Serbians.
Jonathan Mowat continues by writing,
Otpor's leaders knew that they "couldn't use force on someone who . . . had three times more force and weapons than we did," in the words of Lazendic. "We knew what had happened in. Tiananmen, where the army plowed over students with tanks." So violence wouldn't work—and besides, it was the trademark of Milosevic, and Otpor had to stand for something different. Serbia "was a country in which violence was used too many times in daily politics," noted Srdja Popovic, a 27 year-old who called himself Otpor's "ideological commissar." The young activists had to use nonviolent methods "to show how superior, how advanced, how civilized" they were.
This relatively sophisticated knowledge of how to develop nonviolent power was not intuitive. Miljenko Dereta, the director of a private group in Belgrade called Civic Initiatives, got funding from Freedom House in the U.S. to print and distribute 5,000 copies of Gene Sharp's book, "From Dictatorship to Democracy: A Conceptual Framework for Liberation." Otpor got hold of Sharp's main three-volume work, "The Politics of Nonviolent Action," freely adapting sections of it into a Serbian-language notebook they dubbed the "Otpor User Manual." Consciously using this "ideology of nonviolent, individual resistance," in Popovic's words, activists also received direct training from Col. Robert Helvey, a colleague of Sharp, at the Budapest Hilton in March 2000.
Helvey emphasized how to break the people's habits of subservience to authority, and also how to subvert: the regime's "pillars of support," including the police and armed forces. Crucially, he warned them against "contaminants to a nonviolent struggle," especially violent action, which would deter ordinary people from joining the movement: and alienate the international community, from which material and financial assistance could be drawn. As Popovic put it: "Stay nonviolent and you will get the support of the third party."
That support, largely denied to the Serbian opposition before, now began to flow. Otpor and other dissident groups received funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, affiliated with the U.S. government, and Otpor leaders sat down with Daniel Server, the program director for the Balkans at the U.S. Institute for Peace, whose story of having been tear-gassed during an anti-Vietnam War demonstration gave him special credibility in their eyes. The International Republican Institute, also financed by the U.S. government, channeled funding to the opposition and met with Otpor leaders several times. The U.S. Agency for International Development, the wellspring for most of this financing, was also the source of money that went for materials like t-shirts and stickers.
Yet the color revolution did not end with Serbia. With the small nation now under control and a successful destabilization having taken place, a large portion of the Slavic world and Eastern European bloc was now in the crosshairs of the Anglo-Americans. This spread of the color revolution, organized and directed by the West from the word “go,” was the reason behind Mowat’s designation of the chain of events as the “Serbian Virus.” Very soon after Serbia was successfully overthrown, the color revolution motive move on to at least three more countries in Eastern Europe.
Mowat describes this situation as follows:
In the aftermath of the Serbian revolution, the National Endowment for Democracy, Albert Einstein Institution, and related outfits helped establish several Otpor-modeled youth groups in Eastern Europe, notably Zubr in Belarus in January 2001; Kmara in Georgia, in April 2003; and Pora in Ukraine in June 2004. Efforts to overthrow Belarus President Alexsander Luschenko failed in 2001, while the US overthrow of Georgian President Eduard Schevardnadze was successfully accomplished in 2003, using Kmara as part of its operation.
Commenting on that expansion, Albert Einstein staffer Chris Miller, in his report on a 2001 trip to Serbia found on the group's website, reports:
Since the ousting of Milosevic, several members of Otpor have met with members of the Belarusian group Zubr (Bison). In following developments in Belarus since early this year, It is clear that Zubr was developed or at least conceptualized, using Otpor as a model. Also, [Albert Einstein’s report] From Dictatorship to Democracy is available in English on the Zubr website at www.zubr-belarus.com. Of course, success will not be achieved in Belarus or anywhere else, simply by mimicking the actions taken in Serbia. However the successful Serbian nonviolent struggle was highly influenced and aided by the availability of knowledge and information on strategic nonviolent struggle and both successful and unsuccessful past cases, which is transferable.
Otpor focused on building their human resources, especially among youth. An Otpor training manual to "train future trainers" was developed, which contained excerpts from The Politics of Nonviolent Action, provided to Otpor by Robert Helvey during his workshop in Budapest for Serbs in early 2000. It may be applicable for other countries.
And with funding provided by Freedom House and the US government, Otpor established the Center for Nonviolent Resistance, in Budapest, to train these groups.
This harkens back to an article written in 2004 for The Guardian by Ian Traynor, entitled “US Campaign Behind The Turmoil In Kiev,” also cited by Mowat. Indeed, Traynor discussed this very movement in his article when he wrote,
In the centre of Belgrade, there is a dingy office staffed by computer-literate youngsters who call themselves the Centre for Non-violent Resistance. If you want to know how to beat a regime that controls the mass media, the judges, the courts, the security apparatus and the voting stations, the young Belgrade activists are for hire.
They emerged from the anti-Milosevic student movement, Otpor, meaning resistance. The catchy, single-word branding is important. In Georgia last year, the parallel student movement was Kmara. In Belarus, it was Zubr. In Ukraine, it is Pora, meaning high time.
Stickers, spray paint and websites are the young activists' weapons. Irony and street comedy mocking the regime have been hugely successful in puncturing public fear and enraging the powerful.
Going back to “A New Gladio In Action,” Mowat adds to the description of how color revolutions are orchestrated on the ground inside the target nation as well as across national borders. Indeed, the color revolution in Georgia was just such an operation, involving the coordination of organizations and training sessions that spanned from Georgia itself into Serbia. In Serbia’s own color revolution, the people power putsch was organized from Hungary. Similarly, we saw the shipping in of high numbers of death squad fighters who posed as “protesters” early on during the destabilization of Syria (although their true nature became clear very soon after) through a complex network of countries such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, Libya, and Jordan.
Jonathan Mowat describes the cross border operations as follows:
Last year, before becoming president in Georgia, the US-educated Mr Saakashvili traveled from Tbilisi to Belgrade to be coached in the techniques of mass defiance. In Belarus, the US embassy organized the dispatch of young opposition leaders to the Baltic, where they met up with Serbs traveling from Belgrade. In Serbia's case, given the hostile environment in Belgrade, the Americans organized the overthrow from neighboring Hungary—Budapest and Szeged.
[Quoting Traynor] In recent weeks, several Serbs traveled to the Ukraine. Indeed, one of the leaders from Belgrade, Aleksandar Maric, was turned away at the border.The Democratic party's National Democratic Institute, the Republican party's International Republican Institute, the US State Department and USAID are the main agencies involved in these grassroots campaigns as well as the Freedom House NGO and billionaire George Soros' Open Society Institute.
Mowat also quotes an article published in the Associated Press by Dusan Stojanovic, on November 2, 2004, entitled "Serbia's export: Peaceful Revolution." The article elaborates on the “for hire” nature of the revolutionary organizations created with the help of Western intelligence and the U.S. State Department. The article states,
"We knew there would be work for us after Milosevic," said Danijela Nenadic, a program coordinator of the Belgrade-based Center for Nonviolent Resistance. The nongovernmental group emerged from Otpor, the pro-democracy movement that helped sweep Milosevic from power by organizing massive and colorful protests that drew crowds who never previously had the courage to oppose the former Yugoslav president. In Ukraine and Belarus, tens of thousands of people have been staging daily protests—carbon copies of the anti-Milosevic rallies—with "training" provided by the Serbian group.
The group says it has "well-trained" followers in Ukraine and Belarus. In Georgia, Ukraine and Belarus, anti-government activists "saw what we did in Serbia and they contacted us for professional training," group member Sinisa Sikman said. Last year, Otpor's clenched fist was flying high on white flags again—this time in Georgia , when protesters stormed the parliament in an action that led to the toppling of Shevardnadze.
Last month, Ukrainian border authorities denied entry to Alexandar Maric, a member of Otpor and an adviser with the U.S.-based democracy watchdog Freedom House. A Ukrainian student group called Pora was following the strategies of Otpor.
Mowat also adds that
James Woolsey's Freedom House "expressed concern" over Maric's deportation, in an October 14, 2004, press release which reported that he was traveling to Ukraine as part of "an initiative run by Freedom House, the National Democratic Institute, and the International Republican Institute to promote civic participation and oversight during the 2004 presidential and 2006 parliamentary elections in Ukraine." In a related statement, it added that it hoped the deportation was not a sign of the Ukrainian government's "unwillingness to allow the free flow of information and learning across borders that is an integral and accepted part of programs to encourage democratic progress in diverse societies around the world."
In the doublespeak world of destabilization organizations such as USAID, NDI, IRI, and Freedom House, “free flow of information and learning” amounts to nothing more than the free flow of agents of unrest and the learning of propaganda well-funded and specifically designed to bring about the change in domestic national society that is desired by the world Oligarchy.
 See also,
Tarpley, Webster G. Obama: The Postmodern Coup. Mowat, Jonathan. “A New Gladio In Action: ‘Swarming Adolescents.’” Progressive Press. 2008. Pp. 243-270.
 Dobbs, Michael. “U.S. Advice Guided Milosevic Opposition; Political Consultants Helped Yugoslav Opposition Topple Authoritarian Leader.” The Washington Post. December 11, 2000.http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-565855.html Accessed on July 4, 2013.
 See also,
Tarpley, Webster G. Obama: The Postmodern Coup. Mowat, Jonathan. “A New Gladio In Action: ‘Swarming Adolescents.’” Progressive Press. 2008. Pp. 243-270.
 See also,
Tarpley, Webster G. Obama: The Postmodern Coup. Mowat, Jonathan. “A New Gladio In Action: ‘Swarming Adolescents.’” Progressive Press. 2008. Pp. 254-256.
Recently by Brandon Turbeville:
Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of six books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, and The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria. Turbeville has published over 300 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville's podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.
April 4th, 2014 by olddog
Numerous cultures have had holidays dedicated to the celebration of pulling the wool over the eyes of others, from the ancient Romans, to early Muslims, to medieval Christians, to Americans and Europeans today. As April begins, we once again turn a mischievous eye to the concept of the fool and, as always, each person seeks to be the prankster and never the victim.
Unfortunately, even the most vigilant of Americans can sometimes be led astray by a clever ruse, and I believe this is taking place today in the Liberty Movement’s perception of the rising “tensions” between Russia and the West.
In my article Ukraine Crisis: Just Another Globalist-Engineered Powder Keg, I outlined the history of false paradigms and engineered conflicts between numerous nations, including how these conflicts are exploited by global money interests to consolidate and centralize social and political power. The birth of communist Russia, in particular, was directly funded by Western banks and supported with arms and military aid from the U.S. government itself. These sorts of startling facts are not taught in schools and universities exactly because the continued dominance of the money elite relies on continued misrepresentations of legitimate history.
Many in the Liberty Movement have studied and are well aware of the central banking cabal and its stranglehold on the U.S. and Europe. But strangely, some people refuse to acknowledge the substantial possibility that global bankers are also in control of Russia and are playing both sides of the burgeoning economic war.
As the Ukrainian crisis festers and other dangers in the Pacific and the Mideast grow, an odd consensus among alternative analysts is taking hold — namely the belief that President Vladimir Putin and Russia represent some kind of opposition to globalization and the rule of corporate financiers. Perhaps moments in Putin’s rhetoric and the existence of media outlets like RT have seduced elements of the Liberty Movement into assuming that Russia is a “victim” in the grand schemes of Western oligarchy and that Russia is truly the "white knight", the underdog willing to stand up against the New World Order. I’m sorry to say that nothing could be further from the truth.
Russia is just as much a tool of the global elite today as it was after the Bolshevik Revolution, and Vladimir Putin is just as much a socialist puppet as Barack Obama. Let’s start from the beginning of the rebirth of Russia as a regional federation in the 1990s after the fall of the Warsaw Pact.
Mikhail Gorbachev, the leader largely credited with the ultimate dismantling of the Soviet Union and the rise of the “new” Russia, has long been a proponent of the “New World Order” (his words) and centralized global government. In an address entitled “Perspectives On Global Change” to the students of Lafayette College in Easton, Penn., Gorbachev argued that such a solution was necessary to safeguard “freedom.”
The opportunities that existed after the end of the Cold War… were not used properly. At that same time, we saw that the entire world situation did not develop positively. We saw deterioration where there should have been positive movement toward a new world order.
But we still are facing the problem of building such a world order. We have crises: we are facing problems of the environment, of backwardness and poverty, of food shortages. All of these problems are because we do not have a system of global governance.
When asked in 1995 by San Francisco Weekly what Gorbachev meant by the phrase “New World Order,” Jim Garrison, the executive director of the Gorbachev Foundation stated, bluntly that Gorbachev wanted nothing less than global government.
Over the next 20 to 30 years, we are going to end up with world government. … It’s inevitable. It will happen and become just as normal to have a relationship with the rest of the world as we now have, say, if you are a Californian and you go to Vermont.
Take note that it has now been almost 20 years since Garrison's assertion and the motions towards a global currency are picking up great speed. Gorbachev saw global government being achieved through international organizations like the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. But, is this vision of the New World Order limited only to Gorbachev and his inner circle? At the Gorbachev-led State of the World Forum in 1995, Council On Foreign Relations member Zbigniew Brzezinski had this to say:
We do not have a New World Order. … We cannot leap into world government in one quick step. … In brief, the precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.
In Zbigniew K. Brzezinski’s book Between Two Ages: America’s Role In The Technetronic Era, he elaborates on the ideology behind what brand of government the New World Order would be:
The nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty… More intensive efforts to shape a new world monetary structure will have to be undertaken.
National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept… Marxism represents a further vital and creative state in the maturing of man’s universal vision. Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief…
Brzezinski seems to be in total agreement with Gorbachev, but why should anyone care what Brzezinski thinks about the future of American sovereignty? Perhaps it’s because he is a close and influential foreign policy adviser to Obama.
So we have now established that political interests on both sides since the 1990s have called for a New World Order and global government taking a decidedly socialist or Marxist form. Some people might applaud this kind of future, or they might despise it; but the fact remains that this plan is indeed being openly promoted and implemented by government officials and elitists in the East and the West. It is undeniable.
From its very inception, the new Russia was designed to become a catalyst for global governance, but global governance by whom? As they say, always follow the money.
Russia is more beholden to international bankers than perhaps any nation on the planet. After the collapse of the Russian economy and the dissolution of the old Soviet Union, the country was in dire straits. From 1992 to 1996, the IMF intervened in the Russian economy, offering more than $22 billion in aid (officially). This first loan package was presented as a failure when Russia defaulted on its debts, and loans from the IMF restarted through the late ’90s until this very day.
Many people are aware of the IMF involvement in Russia, but few know about the scandal surrounding where those IMF funds specifically went. In 1999, information was made public on the diversion of IMF cash into the coffers of Russian corporate elites, politicians, and even mobsters. This money was supposed to go toward the rebuilding of Russian infrastructure and economy. Instead, the aristocracy and criminal underworld were receiving a large cut of the funds.
The money was diverted and laundered through the Bank of New York, an institution founded in 1784 by none other than internationalist agent and central bank promoter Alexander Hamilton. The bank changed ownership through merger in 2007 and is now called The Bank Of New York Mellon.
The IMF’s first response to the scandal was to divert blame, stating that it had no control over the cash once it was in the hands of the Central Bank of Russia (CBR). After continued revelations on funds being misused or disappearing altogether, the IMF commissioned PricewaterhouseCoopers to audit the CBR. The results of that audit have never been made public. However, in 1999 the Russian government admitted that it had hidden more than $50 billion offshore in a subsidiary bank in the Channel Islands. Part of this money came from IMF bailouts. The former chairman of the CBR, Sergey Dubinin, insisted that the IMF was fully aware of who the funds were going to.
Numerous officials from the chief state auditor to the minister of internal security to the prosecutor general of Russia had come forward with information that corroborated evidence that IMF money was being distributed to the wrong people. The chairman of the Duma Committee on Security stated that some of the IMF loans never made it to Russia. Rather, the money was pumped into the secret foreign accounts of Russia’s highest officials.
Despite all of the admissions and evidence, IMF auditors refused to cite any corruption or malfeasance during their investigations. One would think that they would do everything in their power to find out where their funds went and why. The reason for the cover-up is obvious: The IMF knew exactly who the money was going to. The first bailouts of Russia were designed to buy the cooperation of the Russian political and corporate elite and ensure that the future direction of the nation would follow the globalist plan.
Fast-forward to the present. Putin continues the subversive relationship between Russia and the IMF. In 2009, Putin called for the creation of a “super reserve currency” under the control of the IMF and using the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket as a foundation.
Why would Putin, a supposedly anti-globalist nationalist leader, want the IMF, a supposedly U.S.-controlled institution, to be the global purveyor and overlord of the world economy? It’s because the IMF is not a U.S.-controlled institution; it is a banker-controlled institution. And Putin is a globalist, not a nationalist.
The recent break of Crimea from Ukraine and secession to Russia was partly instigated by the vast concessions required by the IMF if loans to Ukraine were to move forward. One of these concessions included the handing over of Ukrainian gas pipelines to America’s Chevron. Crimean leaders accused Kiev politicians of selling out Ukraine to the global bankers.
However, it was actually Russia’s finance minister and Putin who first pushed for the IMF bailout of Ukraine. It was, in fact, Putin who wanted Ukraine to “sell out” to Western financiers.
Russia’s central bank is also a member of the Bank of International Settlements, the good-old-boys club of the international banking world. The BIS was founded in 1930 and served as the focal point of globalization until after World War II, when evidence arose that the organization had helped the Nazis by funding the German war machine, laundering money for Gestapo officials and hiding funds looted from Europe by the Third Reich.
Due to the scandal, the BIS took a back seat to the IMF and World Bank; but it still exists today. Carroll Quigley, Council on Foreign Relations member, elitist insider and mentor to Bill Clinton, had this to say about the BIS in his book Tragedy And Hope:
The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.
Putin has been elevated to heroic status in much of the mainstream media over the years. TIME magazine, a long-running globalist publication, recently published a front-page article with this tagline: “America’s weak and waffling. Russia’s rich and resurgent — and its leader doesn’t care what anybody thinks of him.”
This cover was used by TIME in every country in which it is distributed, except the United States.
The Times of Britain named Putin “Man Of The Year” in 2013. In Liberty Movement circles, Putin worship has been growing to disturbing levels. I would say at least half of our movement truly believes Putin and Russia to be a guiding light in the fight against globalization and the New World Order. Unfortunately, many people look for heroes to save them when they should be looking to themselves. Putin’s nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize for his “intervention” in the Syrian crisis is celebrated by many freedom fighters here in America, when, in reality, the Obama Administration’s failure to achieve a war footing in the region had nothing to do with the actions of Russia.
Remember, Russia and the U.S. are nothing but false champions dueling in a fake gladiator match paid for by the IMF. The war against Syria was thwarted because the elites were unable to garner enough public support from the American people to make the action viable. Every engineered war needs a gullible percentage of the population to give it momentum. Why didn’t they get their following from the public? It was because of the tireless efforts of the alternative media.
It was the Liberty Movement that exposed the lies behind the Syrian insurgency; the consulate attack in Benghazi, Libya; the CIA’s involvement with al-Qaida in Damascus, etc. It is the Liberty Movement that deserves the credit for disrupting the globalist plan to use Syria as a trigger event for a false confrontation between the U.S. and Russia. Yet many are cheering the elitist puppet Putin while he takes credit for our accomplishments.
The most frightening aspect of the false paradigm between East and West is the potential it creates for the co-option of liberty proponents here in America. If we allow ourselves to be suckered into cheerleading for Russia, or any controlled government for that matter, then we have lost. We will be swallowed up in the tides of war, while supporting false prophets and artificial protagonists. Our mission, the mission for a truly free and sovereign America, will be lost in the confusion and chaos of the global chess game. It is time to accept that the fate of this country and perhaps the future of human freedom rest solely on the shoulders of the resistance here at home. There is no nation out there in the ether of central banking that is going to help us. The sooner we come to terms with the reality that we are on our own, the stronger we will be when the fight begins.
You can contact Brandon Smith at: firstname.lastname@example.org. Alt-Market, where this first appeared, is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.
April 3rd, 2014 by olddog
The above link is to a web page of hundreds of links to informative articles on the State of the world and the processes that control life on earth. Now, no one can claim they don’t know where to look for news about the destruction of America, and other nation states. For those with a desire to learn what happened to our republic, you will have to go a long way to find a better source of essays. I recommend you start with the john Perkins three part video found here. The Corporatocracy and Central and South America. After watching these videos, no one should have to tell you who took down the twin towers and building seven, or why. Saying that, I think its time for people who follow my sites to get some positive information, instead of constant doom and gloom. Mr. Perkins has some positive ideas you need to hear. There is hope left, but it depends on the people to get involved. FREEDOM IS NOT FREE!
How the Richest of the Rich Steal
April 1st, 2014 by olddog
As you read this list of rich and powerful people, keep in mind that there exists hundreds of other groups, Corporations, think tanks, Non Governmental Organizations, Elected Officials, etc, etc, that work together in their pursuit of a One World Order. There will be numerous arms of this Octopus World Government, but their common objective is to subject all others to their central authority, allowing no other to rule or lead on earth.
They have been working together on an on going project for generations, and in spite of generational changes they have not wavered in their objective. They have consolidated control of all necessities of life and profit from our every transaction. Their final goal is now in sight for the existing generation and woe to any who oppose them. All of the machinations you see occurring around the globe are surreptitiously implemented to disguise their goal, and confuse the people of every Nation. What looks like the actions of a few politicians, are in reality obedient servants performing their masters orders. The top tiers of this group of powerful people are the International Investment Banking Families, and though none of them publicly claims superiority, it is a certainty that one of the Rothschild’s sits on top.
Let the reader be aware of every event being orchestrated is to confuse and control people, places, events, and things, so nothing is as it seems, and nothing can be used to incriminate the top dogs. Their most powerful weapon is the ignorance and cognitive dissonance of the people. At this stage of their work, I believe only an act of GOD ALMIGHTY can save us, as the people have year after year, demonstrated their complacent apathy. So much for the land of the free, and the home of the brave!
James P. Harvey aka Olddog
Chairman: Henri de Castries, Chairman and CEO, AXA Group
Paul M. Achleitner, Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank AG
Josef Ackermann, Chairman of the Board, Zurich Insurance Group Ltd
Marcus Agius, Former Chairman, Barclays plc
Helen Alexander, Chairman, UBM plc
Roger C. Altman, Executive Chairman, Evercore Partners
Matti Apunen, Director, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA
Susan Athey, Professor of Economics, Stanford Graduate School of Business
Aslı Aydıntaşbaş, Columnist, Milliyet Newspaper
Ali Babacan, Turkish Deputy Prime Minister for Economic and Financial Affairs
Ed Balls, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer
Francisco Pinto Balsemão, Chairman and CEO, IMPRESA
Nicolas Barré, Managing Editor, Les Echos
José Manuel Barroso, President, European Commission
Nicolas Baverez, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Olivier de Bavinchove, Commander, Eurocorps
John Bell, Regius Professor of Medicine, University of Oxford
Franco Bernabè, Chairman and CEO, Telecom Italia S.p.A.
Jeff Bezos, Founder and CEO, Amazon.com
Carl Bildt, Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs
Anders Borg, Swedish Minister for Finance
Jean François van Boxmeer, CEO, Heineken
Svein Richard Brandtzæg, President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA
Oscar Bronner, Publisher, Der Standard Medienwelt
Peter Carrington, Former Honorary Chairman, Bilderberg Meetings
Juan Luis Cebrián, Executive Chairman, Grupo PRISA
Edmund Clark, President and CEO, TD Bank Group
Kenneth Clarke, Cabinet Minister
Bjarne Corydon, Danish Minister of Finance
Sherard Cowper-Coles, Business Development Director, International, BAE Systems plc
Enrico Cucchiani, CEO, Intesa Sanpaolo SpA
Etienne Davignon, Belgian Minister of State; Former Chairman, Bilderberg Meetings
Ian Davis, Senior Partner Emeritus, McKinsey & Company
Robbert H. Dijkgraaf, Director and Leon Levy Professor, Institute for Advanced Study
Haluk Dinçer, President, Retail and Insurance Group, Sabancı Holding A.S.
Robert Dudley, Group Chief Executive, BP plc
Nicholas N. Eberstadt, Henry Wendt Chair in Political Economy, American Enterprise Institute
Espen Barth Eide, Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs
Börje Ekholm, President and CEO, Investor AB
Thomas Enders, CEO, EADS
J. Michael Evans, Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs & Co.
Ulrik Federspiel, Executive Vice President, Haldor Topsøe A/S
Martin S.Feldstein, Professor of Economics, Harvard University; President Emeritus, NBER
François Fillon, Former French Prime Minister
Mark C. Fishman, President, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research
Douglas J. Flint, Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
Paul Gallagher, Senior Counsel
Timothy F Geithner, Former Secretary of the Treasury
Michael Gfoeller, US Political Consultant
Donald E. Graham, Chairman and CEO, The Washington Post Company
Ulrich Grillo, CEO, Grillo-Werke AG
Lilli Gruber, Journalist – Anchorwoman, La 7 TV
Luis de Guindos, Spanish Minister of Economy and Competitiveness
Stuart Gulliver, Group Chief Executive, HSBC Holdings plc
Felix Gutzwiller, Member of the Swiss Council of States
Victor Halberstadt, Professor of Economics, Leiden University; Former Honorary Secretary General of Bilderberg Meetings
Olli Heinonen, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School of Government
Simon Henry, CFO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
Paul Hermelin, Chairman and CEO, Capgemini Group
Pablo Isla, Chairman and CEO, Inditex Group
Kenneth M. Jacobs, Chairman and CEO, Lazard
James A. Johnson, Chairman, Johnson Capital Partners
Thomas J. Jordan, Chairman of the Governing Board, Swiss National Bank
Vernon E. Jordan, Jr., Managing Director, Lazard Freres & Co. LLC
Robert D. Kaplan, Chief Geopolitical Analyst, Stratfor
Alex Karp, Founder and CEO, Palantir Technologies
John Kerr, Independent Member, House of Lords
Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
Klaus Kleinfeld, Chairman and CEO, Alcoa
Klaas H.W. Knot, President, De Nederlandsche Bank
Mustafa V Koç,. Chairman, Koç Holding A.S.
Roland Koch, CEO, Bilfinger SE
Henry R. Kravis, Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
Marie-Josée Kravis, Senior Fellow and Vice Chair, Hudson Institute
André Kudelski, Chairman and CEO, Kudelski Group
Ulysses Kyriacopoulos, Chairman, S&B Industrial Minerals S.A.
Christine Lagarde, Managing Director, International Monetary Fund
J. Kurt Lauk, Chairman of the Economic Council to the CDU, Berlin
Lawrence Lessig, Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership, Harvard Law School
Thomas Leysen, Chairman of the Board of Directors, KBC Group
Christian Lindner, Party Leader, Free Democratic Party (FDP NRW)
Stefan Löfven, Party Leader, Social Democratic Party (SAP)
Peter Löscher, President and CEO, Siemens AG
Peter Mandelson, Chairman, Global Counsel; Chairman, Lazard International
Jessica T. Mathews, President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Frank McKenna, Chair, Brookfield Asset Management
John Micklethwait, Editor-in-Chief, The Economist
Thierry de Montbrial, President, French Institute for International Relations
Mario Monti, Former Italian Prime Minister
Craig J. Mundie, Senior Advisor to the CEO, Microsoft Corporation
Alberto Nagel, CEO, Mediobanca
H.R.H. Princess Beatrix of The Netherlands
Andrew Y.Ng, Co-Founder, Coursera
Jorma Ollila, Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell, plc
David Omand, Visiting Professor, King's College London
George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer
Emanuele Ottolenghi, Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Soli Özel, Senior Lecturer, Kadir Has University; Columnist, Habertürk Newspaper
Alexis Papahelas, Executive Editor, Kathimerini Newspaper
Şafak Pavey, Turkish MP
Valérie Pécresse, French MP
Richard N. Perle, Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
David H. Petraeus, General, U.S. Army (Retired)
Paulo Portas, Portugal Minister of State and Foreign Affairs
J. Robert S Prichard, Chair, Torys LLP
Viviane Reding, Vice President and Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, European Commission
Heather M. Reisman, CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.
Hélène Rey, Professor of Economics, London Business School
Simon Robertson, Partner, Robertson Robey Associates LLP; Deputy Chairman, HSBC Holdings
Gianfelice Rocca, Chairman,Techint Group
Jacek Rostowski, Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister
Robert E. Rubin, Co-Chairman, Council on Foreign Relations; Former Secretary of the Treasury
Mark Rutte, Dutch Prime Minister
Andreas Schieder, Austrian State Secretary of Finance
Eric E. Schmidt, Executive Chairman, Google Inc.
Rudolf Scholten, Member of the Board of Executive Directors, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG
António José Seguro, Secretary General, Portuguese Socialist Party
Jean-Dominique Senard, CEO, Michelin Group
Kristin Skogen Lund, Director General, Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise
Anne-Marie Slaughter, Bert G. Kerstetter '66 University Professor of Politics and International Affairs, Princeton University
Peter D. Sutherland, Chairman, Goldman Sachs International
Martin Taylor, Former Chairman, Syngenta AG
Tidjane Thiam, Group CEO, Prudential plc
Peter A. Thiel, President, Thiel Capital
Baroness Williams (Clara Molden)
Craig B. Thompson, President and CEO, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Jakob Haldor Topsøe, Partner, AMBROX Capital A/S
Jutta Urpilainen, Finnish Minister of Finance
Daniel L. Vasella, Honorary Chairman, Novartis AG
Peter R. Voser, CEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
Brad Wall, Premier of Saskatchewan Province, Canada
Jacob Wallenberg, Chairman, Investor AB
Kevin Warsh, Distinguished Visiting Fellow, The Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Galen G.Weston, Executive Chairman, Loblaw Companies Limited
Baroness Williams of Crosby, Member, House of Lords
Martin H. Wolf, Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial Times
James D. Wolfensohn, Chairman and CEO, Wolfensohn and Company
David Wright, Vice Chairman, Barclays plc
Robert B. Zoellick, Distinguished Visiting Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics
– See more at: http://humansarefree.com/2013/12/exposing-bilderberg-group-complete-list.html#sthash.kBPIw8Om.dpuf
March 24th, 2014 by olddog
Ok, most of us with more than two inches between our ears know, this Nation started from our resistance to tyranny. What most do not know is, we have never been really free, as we have been led to believe. Because Great Britain’s King was the owner of America and all of its natural resources, and had corporate investors to satisfy, he could not just go belly up on them, so he decided to fake a surrender to stop the cost of the war, and keep a part of the resources to satisfy his investors, his own greed, and good name. The Constitution is a contract between the framers and the King, and the party that negotiated on our behalf were traitors. Since most of you will refuse to believe that, let’s put in behind us for the moment, and concentrate on where we are today.
The International Investment Banking Cartel grew from the Rothschild’s business ventures to various other Bankers he helped to grow rich, and they have been working through various elites in business and government to bleed the Nation dry and gain absolute control of our government; then they expanded to all of the planets other governments with the Central Banking system, as their means of gaining control of their governments.
Today, the are the real rulers of planet Earth, along with the Catholic Church, who the King had ceded England to, to save his soul.
Again, I doubt if many readers will believe this either but the long and short of all this tyranny is we are now indebted to a group of Bankers and others who are demanding through various means of deceit to be given acknowledged control of all Nations, called The New World Order.
They have used so many different methods of coercing Industry, Wall Street, Our Governments both Federal and State, that few people are really aware of the extent of their control, or who owns what.
Here is a letter from Jefferson’s Voice to assist your understanding.
One reason I am very saddened of late is that I see what is left of the resistance to NWO mendacity is allowing itself to be infiltrated, deceived, and fractured with this BS on Russia (and China, and BRICS). The day before yesterday I was reading where Russia is moving forward in partnership with the US and Europe on implementing smart grid! (Picture the diagram in Patrick Wood's presentation where the globalists want smart grid literally connected around the globe). Russia is adopting Agenda 21, the Trilateralist (and Zionists) spread their tentacles into Russia after its economy collapsed, and Putin supports NWO regionalization. Then there is Antony Sutton's research proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that American financiers and industrialists (and international bankers) financially and logistically supported the rise of the USSR and Hitler. So how can we possibly think that Russia has not already been captured and is now a pawn?
Does this make sense to you? I don't mean to put you on the spot, I am merely hoping that my points demonstrate a clear pattern and then there is the MOTIVE as to why the global elite would continue to pit country against country for profit and control.
Sadly, we must acknowledge that Chussodovsky (Global Research) is like Tarpley, he is a resolute socialist, and as such will not "go all the way" to condemn world wide socialism. These elite intellectuals believe that global socialism is a good thing and they blindly think by exposing the corruption they can get the right people to be rulers.
They are statists and as such have a large blind spot that you and I do not have. I think the best educational tools for now are the Antony Sutton videos presented with introductions. Talk to you again soon, dear friend. Please watch these videos when you have time. Thanks.
Are you getting the big picture yet folks? Are you beginning to understand what we are up against, and our own complicity in this mess? That’s right folks, we are just as responsible as the Bankers. We should have known just by instinct alone that something was fishy, when it took so little to convince us to sacrifice our children in all the wars posted above. So what, if we were enticed to concentrate on having fun and more things than we needed. Why were we so easily fooled into supporting the death of so many thousands of our own families? Even today, after all these un-necessary tragedies, we will send our children to war at the drop of a hat. Maybe more of us older folks should get off our ass and do some reading, instead of listening to the talking heads on the evening news, which is owned and controlled by the elites. Does it not embarrass you to see how easy it has been for them to get us to cut our own throats, not to mention our souls? Sane Nations do not murder people unless they are under attack, or have proof its coming. We have a debt alright, but it’s not to the damn Bankers, it’s to the men and women who have died in vain. You would do well to go here and read about one of the few real heroes’, America has produced; General Smedley Butler. War Is A Racket , Who Pays The Bills? , How To Smash This Racket! , To Hell With War! Let’s be really honest again, and stop the New World Order, make your demands known by all who represent you. CLEAN HOUSE DOWN TO THE LAST MOUSE. WE NEED LEADERS WHO CANNOT, AND WILL NOT BE COERCERED! GET US OUT OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER!