Categories » ‘Democracy’
February 11th, 2016 by olddog
Written by Paul Rosenberg
Over the last few months a stream of articles have crossed my screen, all proclaiming the need of governments and banks to eliminate cash. I’m sure you’ve noticed them too.
It is terrorists and other assorted madmen, we are told, who use cash. And so, to protect us from being blown up and dismembered on our very own street corners, governments will have to ban it.
It would actually take some effort to imagine a more obvious, naked attempt at fearmongering. Cash – in daily use for centuries if not millennia – is now, suddenly, the agent of spring-loaded, instant death? And we’re supposed to just accept that line?
But there are good reasons why the insiders are promoting these stories now. The first of them, perhaps, is simply that they can: After 9/11, a massive wave of compliance surged through the West. It may not last forever, but it’s still rolling, and if the entertainment corporations can pump enough fear into minds that want to believe, they may just get them to buy it.
The second reason, however, is the real driver:
Negative Interest Rates
The urgency of their move to ban one of the longest-lasting pillars of daily life means that the backroom elites think it will be necessary soon. It would appear that the central banks, the IMF, the World Bank, the BIS, and all their backers, see the elimination of cash as a central survival strategy.
The reason is simple: cash would allow people to escape from the one thing that could save their larcenous currency system: negative interest rates.
To make this clear, I like to paraphrase a famous (and good) quote from Alan Greenspan, back from 1966, during his Ayn Randian days: The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.
That was a true statement, and with a slight modification, it succinctly explains the new war on cash:
The preservation of an insolvent currency system requires that the owners of currency have no way to protect it.
Cash is currency that you hold in your own hands, that stands more or less alone. It is primarily external to bank control. Electronic money – bank balances, credit, etc. – remains inside the banking system and fully “subject to bank control”!
A combination of no cash and negative interest rates would be a quiet, permanent version of what was done in Cyprus, where the government simply shut down everything, allowed only the smallest deductions via ATMs, and then stole money from thousands of bank accounts at once.
The Cypriot spectacle was fairly large, however, and that tends to undermine the legitimacy of rulership. So, it is much better to have no ATMs and no cash at all. There would be no lines of angry people talking to each other, only isolated losers with no recourse, licking their wounds while the talking heads on television tell them to stay calm and watch the flashing images.
Negative interest rates would give the banks 100% control over your purchases. They could, even in the worst pinch, allow you to purchase food while freezing the rest of your money. The average person would have no recourse and would simply be robbed… but very smoothly and with no human face to blame it on.
Negative interest rates mean that your bank account shrinks day by day, automatically. Your $1000 in January becomes $950 by December. And where does that money go? To the banks, of course, and to the government. They siphon your money away, drip by drip, and there’s nothing you can do about it. This accomplishes several things for them at once:
It finances government, limit-lessly and automatically. Forget tax filings; they can just take as they please.
It pays off the bad debt of the big banks. (And there are oceans of debt.)
It forces you to spend everything you’ve got, as soon as you get it. (Otherwise it will shrink.)
It gives the system full control over your financial life. Everything is monitored, everything is tracked, and every single transaction must be approved by them (or not). If they decide they don’t like you, you’re instantly reduced to begging.
In short, this is a direct return to serfdom.
I suggest that you start talking to your friends and neighbors about this now, before it’s too late. Don’t let them comply without a fight.
February 8th, 2016 by olddog
By Publius Huldah
According to the original intent of our Constitution, Ted Cruz & Marco Rubio are not eligible to be President because their fathers weren’t US citizens at the times they were born. So they are not “natural born citizens”.
So! How is this handled? Who calls it? Who makes the ruling? Do we “file a lawsuit” and let federal judges decide? “Slap your hands!”, our Framers would say. They would say, “READ THE CONSTITUTION AND SEE WHAT IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN!”
[Our lives would be so much simpler – and our Country so much better off – if we read & supported our Constitution.]
Read the 12th Amendment. That sets forth the procedures for election of President and VP. Note that ELECTORS are supposed to be the ones making the selection – NOT THE PEOPLE. [There is a reason for that.] For an illustration of how this works, go HERE and read the subheadings, “Electors” Appointed by States Were To Choose The President! and The 12th Amendment Establishes Procedures For Voting By Electors.
So! Assume we followed the Constitution on this issue and we get to the part where Congress is counting the votes as provided by 12th Amendment. And Lo! Congress discovers that the person who got the most votes for President is NOT QUALIFIED by reason of age, or not being a natural born citizen, or not having been for at least 14 years a Resident within the United States.
Obviously, it’s Congress’ job to make the ruling – to make the call – on whether the President and VP – selected by the ELECTORS – are qualified under Art. II, Sec. 1, clause 5.
So what happens if Congress finds that the person with the most votes for President is not qualified? We look to Sec. 3 of the 20th Amendment. It tells us what happens. If the President elect has failed to qualify, then the VP elect shall act as President… Now, read the rest of that Section. We would also need to see whether Congress has made any of the authorized laws providing for such contingencies.
So, under the Constitution as written, it is Congress’ job to make the call as to whether the President elect and the VP elect are qualified.
THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE FOR THE FEDERAL COURTS TO DECIDE. That is because this is a “political question” – not a “legal question”. The power to make the ruling as to whether the president elect or the VP elect are qualified has been delegated to CONGRESS. Traditionally, federal courts have “abstained” from deciding “political questions”.
We study this in our first year constitutional law class, when we study judicial “abstention” from certain kinds of cases including cases which involve “political questions” or the exercise of powers delegated to the Legislative or Executive branches. When a power is delegated to one of the “political branches” (Legislative or Executive), the federal courts (the “legal branch”) have traditionally declined to interfere and substitute their judgment for that of the “political branch” to which the Power was delegated.
And what if Congress gives an ineligible person a pass – as they did with obama? WELL THEN, SHAME ON US –
BECAUSE WE ARE THE ONES WHO ELECTED THOSE IGNORANT COWARDS TO OFFICE!
I Sure would love to lock Publius Huldah and Judge Anna Maria Riezinger in the same room and find out what they believed when they were let out. Most certainly they are both highly intelligent scholars, but they obviously have some different opinions on American governance. My preference would be for them both to unite on Anna’s research. Maybe then the ignorant sheeple would understand they have been beguiled from the cradle and are not qualified to be American’s. AMERICA HAS BEEN UNDER THE RULE OF THE INTERNATIONAL BANKING CARTEL FROM THE GET GO, AND IT IS “NOT A DEMOCRACY”! IT’S A CORPORATION! THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION IS ONLY USED TO KEEP US CONFUSED WHEN IT SUITS THEM. THE CORPORATE BY-LAWS ARE THE CORPORATIONS CONSTITUTION.
WAKE THE HELL UP AMERICA!
February 6th, 2016 by olddog
By Ms. RoseAnn Salanitri
December 17, 2015-TPATH- Regardless of which presidential candidate you support, it is highly unlikely that any one of them will be able to turn back the pages of time to when America was a shining city on a hill. Many believe that our plummet from nobility is multi-faceted and cannot be laid squarely at any one person’s feet or attributed to any one cause. That opinion may not be accurate.
Our Founding Fathers created a form of government that would guide us through a myriad of challenges. They did not do so lightly. They researched. They argued. They debated and they agonized over every aspect of our Constitution, fully understanding the final draft’s attributes and loopholes. For more than a century and a half, the system worked – even through the Civil War and the immoral challenges of slavery. The ability of the Constitution to be amended was significant and our humble Founders understood that significance. They also understood that this significant attribute could also lead to our national demise. Had they been prophets, they would have also foreseen the damage progressive thinking would have on our way of life and the liberties we hold so dear. Prophecy aside, they did understand that the survival of these United States was dependant on a moral and religious people.
In October of 1798 in an address to General Walker, John Adams is quoted as saying: “…Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Adams knew what he said and why he said it. It is unfortunate that only this segment of his speech is quoted. Its entirety speaks volumes to the primary cause responsible for our impending national doom.
Therefore, as we ponder how to “Make America Great Again,” perhaps we should be looking to the wisdom of one of our most passionate founders and not to any modern day political figure. Adams not only stated clearly that morality and religion were foundational principles of our Constitution, he also stated why. Below are segments of that speech that apply directly to us today.
…But should the people of America once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another, and towards foreign nations, which assumes the language of justice and moderation while it is practising (sic) iniquity and extravagance…in the most captivating manner the charming pictures of candor, frankness, and sincerity, while it is rioting in rapine and insolence, this country will be the most miserable habitation in the New World; because we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other… (Emphasis added)
Adams may not have known Obama, or One World Order people, or our feckless representatives personally, but he certainly knew about the character traits they imbue. He understood that a government that sought to protect personal liberty could not do that if its citizens were not capable of governing themselves on a personal basis. No, Adams was not a prophet. However, his understanding of human nature and its effects on government can be considered prophetic.
As intuitive as Adams may have been, even he did not foresee a movement that would initialize a stronghold on the very notion of Providence and its God – a movement that would be A-religious and consequently A-moral. Arguably, Charles Darwin was as influential as Christ Himself on succeeding cultures and governments. Darwinism clearly gives license to those wishing to become their own gods, since the real God and His precepts and principles are removed from their belief system. The American Progressive/Regressive Movement is the best example of a philosophy based on Darwinism that is changing our country.
And like its predecessor millennia ago in the Garden of Eden, these modern day Adams and Eves that embrace evolution believe they can create their own morality and consequently their own version of truth. It’s really the same old apple. In reality, their logic is not flawed. If God isn’t the creator, either He is a liar or He doesn’t exist. If the latter is true, then the progressive/regressives would be correct. Absolute truth would not exist, and therefore subjective truth reigns. They fail to realize that if truth is not absolute, it is not truth at all but merely opinion. In addition to just being plain wrong, the problem is that their subjective application has filled our prisons, destroyed our system of government, and perverted our children. It has perverted the very principle of freedom of religion into freedom from religion and in so doing has slowly been corrupting our moral foundation. As the Bible states: “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” Psalm 11:3.
Barack Obama, our present day progressive/regressive icon, was not the first narcissist to embrace racism. Hitler, Stalin and Mao beat him to the punch – all evolutionists that believed they could set their own standards based on their subjective truths. We know these names and the horrors they committed unbridled by absolute truth or righteousness that respects life; however, there were still others before them. All were charismatic and passionate speakers. These tyrants capitalized on a misinformed and misguided populace that had no standard to judge their rhetoric by. And there is no absolute standard except for the Word of God, which is systematically being removed from the public conscience under the guise of freedom of religion. Under these conditions, it should be no surprise that we, as a nation, have fallen with such force and such speed. Adams’ statement that our government was made for a moral and religious people should be echoing throughout our collective national soul. Banishing God has not led to a Utopian way of life. It never has and it never will. So whether our national demise is multi-faceted or not, its cause is singular: we are fast becoming a Godless nation – unfortunately proving Adams correct.
So while we debate which political party is better or which presidential candidate can restore America to greatness, the wise among us will be standing on their knees and waiving the banner of truth and truth’s one and only God. If America repents, and if America turns from legalizing immorality and justifying infanticide among other things, then and only then does America have a chance of restoring its greatness. And to be sure, greatness cannot be restored to us by any man except the man Jesus Christ. While Christ may not be running for the presidency, let’s once again elect Him as our one and only king, as they did at the time of the Revolutionary War. If you are so inclined, I encourage you to join with me in coining a new, but old cry:
No King but Jesus; No Sovereign but God.
Simple words but they carry the greatest hope for a dying nation.
January 30th, 2016 by olddog
By Dave Hodges
Russia’s air defense missiles, the S-400 have been moved into position in defense of Russian ICBM’s which is being readied for World War III.
Russia’s TASS Agency,as reported by Next News Network, is reporting that 10 missile regiments of Russia’s Strategic Missile Force are combat ready and are now positioned at the highest level of alert.
In a press release, the Strategic Missile Force’s press office stated that Seven regiments armed with Topol, Topol-M and Yars mobile missile systems will advance for combat patrols in the Ivanovo, Novosibirsk, Sverdlovsk, Kirov and Irkutsk Regions, the Altai Territory and the Republic of Mary E.
The press office further stated that, “The strategic missile forces will practice moving missile systems to field positions, performing marches with the change of field positions, carrying out measures for organization of the ground, camouflaging, protecting and defending military hardware and field positions.”
If this is not a provocative action by the Russians in preparation for World War III, I don’t know what constitute such an action.
If you chase a rabbit into his hole, he will stay there and starve to death if you keep making threats at the mouth of the hole. Is this what the Bankers Media Moguls are up to, or are they preparing to get rid of us worthless eaters?
January 22nd, 2016 by olddog
NEWS FROM OLDDOG
We are presently having about one inch per hour of snow accumulation here in the NC Mountains, so don’t be surprised if we are off line for a while. The weather goons are predicting eighteen inches here, and the trees will soon be falling.
Have a good day!
If you don’t conform to the crowd now, you’re a ‘radical’
That’s me in the middle!
Sovereign Valley Farm, Chile
In 2014, the Journal of Neuroscience published the results of a unique study that probed deep into human emotion.
Two Dutch scientists had conducted an experiment in which they exposed test subjects to a wide range of scenarios to evoke some of the most primal human emotions– joy, anger, etc.
Subjects were hooked up to an electro-encephalogram (EEG) in order to quantitatively measure their brains’ cognitive response to powerful emotions.
And the results were pretty conclusive: the most powerful emotional experience, as measured by the sheer volume of human brain activity and neurological reaction, was humiliation.
This really explains a lot when you think about it.
Deep down we human beings are social creatures. We seek acceptance from the group.
It’s why conformity is so much easier than standing apart from the crowd, even when the crowd makes absolutely no sense.
And those who don’t conform and think independently are labeled radicals.
Our financial system is a great example of this.
They’ve spiked the punch bowl with so many lies. Home prices always go up. The debt doesn’t matter because we owe it to ourselves. We can always print more money.
None of this nonsense is true. But the financial establishment tells us so. Big media repeats it over and over again. Eventually hundreds of millions of people believe it.
And anyone who dares question the sanctity of this system is labeled a radical.
(This goes for just about everything now. Eerily, governments are now branding people who disagree with the state as radicals.)
This is total BS.
You’re not a radical because the federal government’s own balance sheet shows that they are hopelessly insolvent to the tune of negative $17.7 trillion.
You’re not a radical because the US Federal Reserve’s balance sheet shows that, on a mark to market basis, they too are insolvent.
You’re not a radical because the balance sheet of the FDIC shows that they don’t maintain the minimum amount of capital as required by law to adequately insure the banking system.
You’re not a radical because the financial statements of some of the largest banks in the country show that they only keep a tiny percentage of your savings on reserve, and park the rest of your money in some foolish investment fad, or loan it to a bankrupt government.
You’re not a radical because the annual reports of the largest trust funds in the US retirement system show that they are either pitifully underfunded, or entirely out of cash.
You’re not a radical because you think that, maybe just maybe, there might be negative consequences at some point down the road from all of this insanity…
… that, maybe just maybe, when nearly every major component of the financial system is either highly illiquid or completely insolvent, that there could possibly be trouble down the road.
Most of all, you’re not a radical because you have a Plan B.
It hardly seems outlandish to look at objective, publicly available data and think “wow, this entire banking system is built on a house of cards…” and then to actually do something about it.
There are so many options.
You might look abroad to hold a portion of your savings where the banks are extremely liquid and well capitalized, located in a jurisdiction with minimal debt.
Or you might simply consider holding some physical cash, or a mix between physical cash and precious metals.
These aren’t radical ideas. It’s sensible to take astute, rational steps to protect yourself from the consequences of such obvious risks.
Have a nice weekend,
What good thing can be said for a nation so stupid they continue supporting the very system that is destroying them? Talk about humiliation! Just wait till the shit really hits the fan in America. Most of the city folks are already incapable of wiping their ass, and soon they will be steeling your eye glasses to barter with, and, or your shoes and socks. If you’re not capable and ready to blow their head off, they will sooner or later become cannibals’ and eat you alive. GOOD LUCK SUCKERS!
January 21st, 2016 by olddog
By Tim Brown
It seems everywhere we look that the Second Amendment is under attack. Just last month the New Jersey Assembly Law & Public Safety Committee was considering legislation that would ban ammunition under the auspices of protecting police. Now it would appear from a brief reading of the proposal that the ammunition spoken of would be “armor piercing ammunition”, but the language also encompasses any ammo that is deemed to “pose a threat to the safety and well being of law enforcement.” Can anyone say “all” ammunition?
Let’s keep in mind that most law enforcement wear Level II-A protective vests that stop 9mm and .40 bullets. So that means that if strictly taken for armor piercing all other ammunition would be banned. This means you would be unable to get ammo for your AR-15, many hunting rifles and even some handguns, such as your trusty .45.
We are not even talking just common bullets. In addition, Ammoland.com states, “Common hunting, target, and self-defense ammunition would be subject to ban, along with BB’s, airgun pellets, and non-metallic ammunition like plastic airsoft pellets, if the Attorney General decides that they pose a threat to the safety and well being of law enforcement. “
The NRA also agrees with Ammoland’s assessment stating,
“Although the bill only mentions handgun ammunition, it is in fact not limited to handgun ammunition, and would apply to all rifle ammunition for which a handgun is ever made. As an increasing number of gun manufacturers make handgun models that shoot rifle caliber ammunition, the line between “handgun” vs. “rifle” ammunition has become blurred, and the New Jersey State Police have already begun treating rifle ammunition in this category as if it were handgun ammunition for regulatory purposes. As long as a handgun exists that shoots a particular caliber of rifle ammunition, New Jersey treats that ammunition as if it were handgun ammunition. “
The bills (Assembly Bill A588 & A1013) went even further and stated, “This bill makes using a defaced or stolen firearm in causing serious bodily injury or bodily injury to a law enforcement officer a crime.” So if you purchased a firearm from someone, paid a price and had a bill of sale (and the firearm was either stolen or had the serial number removed) and cops broke down your door and you defended yourself with the weapon and injured or killed the officer, you could be charged with a crime!
It is outrageous that these law makers do not respect their constituents enough to come head on after the guns people use. They have to manipulate and blow things out of proportion in order to get their agendas accomplished. However, in this instance they are doing a sneak attack and basically saying, “It’s OK for you to have weapons, you just can’t have ammunition.” I have to say this is a brilliant strategy but that is not to pat them on the back. I’m betting that most people see this and know they better obtain their ammo now, because once the ban is passed, it won’t be available in Jersey. In fact, if you are caught with it, it will probably be grounds for fines and jail time.
No doubt everyone has heard of the cries last year demanding federal legislation to ban high capacity ammunition clips after congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot.
Our own President is even undertaking efforts for more gun legislation, albeit “under the radar”, which many commentators connected to the Fast & Furious scandal. On top of that the New UN Small Arms Treaty is an international agreement which is seeking to disarm Americans. Some say it is an end around the 2nd Amendment. Others say no the Constitution would prevail over it. Let’s always keep at the forefront of our minds that the UN does not have our best interest at heart. Sadly, neither does the current occupant of the White House. This treaty would be up for ratification this year by the Senate.
January 18th, 2016 by olddog
By Tim Brown
The issue over the idea of natural born citizen is being touted quite a bit leading up to the GOP debate this week and in its wake, too many people are confused and have not looked at what the Constitution says, nor have they taken the time to go back and see how the founders understood the term. They regurgitate what conservative talking heads and such spew out about Supreme Court rulings and cite laws that do not deal with the term natural born citizen. However, the elephant in the room (or the Constitution) that is never addressed is the differences of how there are the apparent differences of citizens in the Constitution itself.
I have alluded to this previously when pointing out that the Constitution specifically addresses in the very qualifications that there are natural born citizens and citizens.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution reads:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. (Emphasis mine)
Now, there is no question that men like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal all meet the criteria of being at least 35 years old and have been residents in the States. There is also no question that these men are citizens. The question is, are they natural born citizens.
The other night in the debate, Ted Cruz mixed up natural born citizen and citizen just like he has in the past. However, he’s not the only one that does that. There are lots of people who claim you are either a citizen or a naturalized citizen and there is nothing else that can be added to another kind of citizen, but that’s not what the framers had in mind and it isn’t even what the Constitution presents to us.
First, as has been very eloquently presented by Publius Huldah, the founders had at least three copies of Vattel’s Law of Nations in their possession during the first Constitutional Convention and they made use of it. In that book, it is the first place that we read about a natural born citizen. Vattel writes concerning citizens and natives:
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. (Emphasis mine)
Clearly, Vattel, in defining natural born citizen, would have deemed Obama, Cruz, Jindal and Rubio as those who are not natural born citizens. I really don’t think there is any argument against Vattel on that. However, the question is, does the Constitution follow that thinking? Lo, and behold, it does.
As cited above, there is a clear distinction between a natural born citizen and the citizens in the grandfather clause. While many of those in America would be considered citizens at the time of the founding, they would never be natural born citizens and so this was the need for the grandfather clause.
But consider in addition to Article II, Section 1 that deals with the requirement to be a natural born citizen for the President, that there are other requirements for representatives and senators and notice the language:
Article I, Section 2 states:
“No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.”
Article I, Section 3 states:
“No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.”
Do you notice something that is obviously missing from a requirement of these offices that is in the requirement for President? That’s right, there is no requirement for representatives and senators to be natural born citizens. Rather, the framers simply used the term citizen, as they did in Article II, Section 1. We can also see that they emphasized a length of time one had to be a citizen to hold that office (7 years for a representative and 9 years for a senator).
So, what is the issue, you ask? Clearly, the framers saw, for lack of a better term, “different classes of citizens.” This has nothing to do with diminishing the rights of any citizen, but distinguished who would have the privilege of serving in these offices and who could not.
The real difference here is this: natural born citizen is a fact and citizen is a legal status.
And lest you think I’m straining at gnats here, understand that the “devil is always in the details,” or in this case, the distinction of natural born citizen and citizen. The framers have even written in such a way to make that distinction. Every other place in the Constitution, only the term citizen is used and I believe it was a clear indication of protecting an office that only one man holds and they wanted to ensure that his loyalties were not divided with dual citizenship allegiances.
My contention in this matter is not about personalities. I have addressed the issue with Obama and now I’m addressing it with those who claim to be on my side. The issue is one of principle. To mix and match citizen with natural born citizen is to undermine the very wording of the Constitution and distinction of those terms for the purpose of holding office.
This article is far longer than I desired it to be already, but I hope that it sets a foundation of understanding that the Constitution presents the two citizens as distinct. I will continue my thoughts on this in a future installment. Stay tuned.
January 16th, 2016 by olddog
G’day to You!
Judge Anna reports 15JAN2016
SHARE THIS EVERYWHERE
Stop what ever you are doing – We the people are being presented with a very serious proposal that merits your undivided attention!
Posted on January 15, 2016 by arnierosner
Jan 15, 2016, at 2:54 PM, Anna von Reitz <email@example.com> wrote:
Why Unrest of Any Kind Defeats Both Versions of America
There has been a lot of inappropriate talk about “civil war” in America. Let’s be perfectly blunt.
The Federal United States has been operated as a puppet by the British Government which in turn has been operated as a puppet by the City State of Westminster aka Inner City of London which has been operated by international banking cartels and the Bar for generations. In turn, these organizations have been influenced, led, and perpetuated by what Frank O’Collins calls “the Roman Cult” within the Roman Catholic Church.
Americans, like the British People, have gone along trustingly and been abused and enslaved.
We, Americans, have been used repeatedly as the “muscle” behind wars for profit and illegal and immoral police actions in other countries undertaken by the British Crown Corporation and its cronies throughout the world, with the result that we are widely blamed and despised as the perpetrators of all this greed and violence when in fact we have been victims like everyone else and have merely been more gullible than the rest of the world.
A careful reading of the historical documents, especially the treaties ending the Revolutionary War and The Constitution, reveals that the British retained control of a substantial portion of the American jurisdiction of the sea including our ability to conclude international treaties and commercial trade agreements—both of which have been crippled and controlled since the birth of our nation by this arrangement.
In exchange for our Forefather’s agreement to this deplorably bad deal, the British Monarch was made our Trustee on the High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways. It was thought that his clear obligation to the Americans in this capacity would bind his hands and prevent him from doing us harm. In 1794 a treaty between the Americans and the City State of Westminster was also concluded in which we were promised “perpetual” friendship and amity.
We definitely need to remind them of the meaning of “perpetual”.
So here we are at the beginning of the twenty-first century and our Trustees have proven to be our worst enemies— not only our worst enemies, but worst enemies of all freedom-loving and decent people everywhere. Since 1866 the British Government has privately promoted and perpetuated a policy of eternal war and enslavement of the world’s population while keeping up an appearance of being the bulwark and defender of western civilization. Like a pedophile acting as a Foster Parent, the British Government has spared no expense in its efforts to cover up its dirty work, but it is at last discovered.
The Federal United States is and has always been an instrumentality of the British Government and the international banks and the Bar Associations and it is the Federal United States—not the Continental United States— which has been guilty of all the crimes against humanity which have been racked up and placed at the door of the hapless Americans who have been deceived into believing that the Federal United States is or ever was their lawful government.
Time to wake up. We have been hosts for these parasites and now they are moving on to attempt to parasitize China and its vast population.
The so-called “Federal Government” is a foreign corporation under contract to provide our States with nineteen enumerated services directed by our Trustee the British Monarch and his corporate Executive Officer known as the “President of the United States”. The British Monarch was paid for this “service” with tribute in the form of mineral wealth extracted from the American States and was faithfully paid for involving us in an endless stream of unjust police actions and dirty commercial deals and then handing us the blame and the bills.
Let it stand before the American People and the entire world who the guilty parties actually are: the administration of Queen Elizabeth II, her corporation, ELIZABETH II, the British Crown Corporation and its franchises worldwide, the Lords of the Admiralty and the City-State of Westminister together with all its Successor Organizations and franchises, and the Holy See doing business as FRANCISCUS are directly and personally responsible for all this injustice and mayhem and mis-administration of the Public Trust in Britain, America, the Commonwealth, India, Japan, all of Western Europe and most of Eastern Europe, too.
The populations of all these countries have a grudge and many, many claims against these perpetrators; the People of China would be well-warned and advised not to accept any “gifts” from Jacob Rothshild or the World Bank or QEII, either. Gold and silver are not food, not fuel, and not the raw resources that China needs. Apart from being excellent conductors of electricity and photo emulsions, of what use are these so-called “precious” commodities?
Time to wake up.
We have all been bamboozled by these phonies (as in Phoenicians) long enough.
The bankers and lawyers who have acted as the foot soldiers of this global Evil Empire have planned various scenarios for the demise of America. First of all, we are to be blamed for all their sins. Second of all, we are to be charged with all their crimes. Third, we are to be stripped of whatever wealth we still have after they have stolen as much as they can possibly steal to pay their debts.
From their standpoint, it would be expedient to foment a civil war on our soil. There are a number of reasons.
First, it kills off their lawful Creditors, the American People. They are now claiming in the United Nations that we no longer exist and that the heirs of their Creditors are “absent” or “unknown”. This pathetic excuse is being offered as a means of avoiding paying back the American People for gold illegally confiscated in the 1930’s and labor and resources exchanged for no payment but hot air and paper ever since.
Second, murder of the American People allows them to collect on life insurance policies that they have gratuitously established on each and every one of us, naming themselves and their corporations as the beneficiaries.
Third, murder of the American People leaves an opportunity for them and their buddies to claim the “abandoned property” just as they did in Germany after the War.
They call this “plowing the field”—- emptying the land of its people and decrepit buildings and infrastructure so that it can be rebuilt under new ownership: theirs.
However, they have to have a plausible reason for attacking the American People, because after all they are under public contract to protect us and are continuing to siphon off large payments from our public treasuries for the service. They therefore have to find some sneaky, backdoor means to excuse their actions — and their continuing crimes against us.
It is time to recognize these criminals for who and what they are and to bring a stop to them and their predations upon the entire world. The most expedient way to do this is for everyone worldwide to cease operating as any form of corporation—simply dissolve them all, nationalize their assets in the case of “government” corporations, demand that the Pope acting as CEO liquidate those corporations that have acted as criminal syndicates—-including the major banks. Apply the Icelandic Answer.
Everyone please note that although these vermin have been misrepresenting the American People to the rest of the world for the past 150 years and mischaracterizing us at home, they are NOT the American People owed the land jurisdiction of the United States and never have been. The mis-administration and usurpation of our government that has been accomplished via semantic deceit and other forms of fraud, but that, too, has been discovered and is at an end.
If those responsible for this egregious behavior have any hope of surviving themselves, they must make amends to the rest of the planet and the people they have harmed.
In the case of the Federal United States the turning of the worm leaves one thing very clear: any attacks against the unarmed and peaceful American People to whom they owe “good faith service” will be instantly recognized as crimes of war and aggression by commercial mercenaries disguised as units of government.
Any failure to correct the political status of Americans to reflect their actual political status as “free sovereign and independent people of the United States” — that is, the Continental United States— like any attempt to mischaracterize their Creditors and the Heirs of their Creditors will also be recognized for what it is and rebutted.
Any failure of the British Monarch and the “President of the United States” to repay all the debt of the Federal United States that is lawfully owed to the innocent American People of the Continental United States will be obvious self-interest and default upon debt in the full view of all other nations.
When all those other peoples and nations have been afforded a full view of what has gone on here and stop to consider how they, too, have been abused, lied about, defrauded, and enslaved by these Babylonian Snake Oil Salesmen in tweeds, they will conclude as we have that we have all suffered from a single malady which has its world headquarters in the Inner City of London. And then we can all take appropriate action—like enforcement of the $279 trillion dollar International Commercial Obligation Lien which the Americans have placed against the American Bar Association, the International Bar Association and the misnamed Department of Justice which matures tomorrow.
The people of the Earth must unite against the evils perpetuated by the inhabitants of “the World”—a fake, illusory Satanic construct incorporated legal fictions— that is, lies— which serves only to mask the identities and obscure the filthy and violent intentions of profoundly evil men masquerading as philanthropists and pillars of the global community instead.
To all men and women everywhere the alarm goes forth and the claim in equity is clearly stated. This is our Earth. It belongs to us, not to any corporation. This, the American Government, as opposed to the “US Government” is a lawful and peaceful government “of the people, by the people and for the people”—- not a government “of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation”.
If we, the people of the Continental United States are forced to take up arms against those operating the Federal United States, it will be a clarion call for your joint understanding and assistance in removing this source of criminality from our mutual midst. Let the Federal United States and the Governments of Britain and the City-State of Westminster and the administration of the Vatican stand revealed as crime syndicates that have created and which are responsible for much of the poverty, misery, injustice, and conflict that have infested our planet for generations—-and not as they would portray themselves as enlightened philanthropists.
Petty crooks operating on a giant stage is much closer to the truth of it.
As each person reads this and knows that we can choose global peace or global war and that it is not negotiable that innocent victims should again bear the brunt of this criminality, don’t be afraid just because you are suddenlyaware that you are “just one person” in the midst of a universe. Become aware instead that you are the universe
I AM I AM.
I AM ONE.
I AM NOW.
Judge Anna Maria Riezinger
Alaska State Superior Court
January 15th, 2016 by olddog
By Anna Von Reitz
You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 1900 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove unwarranted personal attacks. Use the golden rule; “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
Thursday, January 14, 2016
Ode to Sheriff Mack How To Get Enforcement of the Actual Law of the Land?
People all over this country are complaining about “lack of enforcement” of the basic Organic and Public Laws. I hate to break it to you, but you all have to take action in your own behalf to provide enforcement. You are “self-governing”— remember?
The rats— for profit governmental services corporations run by banks– have usurped upon your lawful jurisdiction and set up incorporated “Counties” and incorporated “States”. As soon as you incorporate anything, it is removed from the jurisdiction of the land and taken out from under the Law of the Land (including the Constitution) and moved to the international jurisdiction of the sea and the Law of the Sea.
As a result, you no longer have Sheriffs operating under the Law of the Land and you no longer have enforcement of the Organic and Public Laws. What you have are men in “similarly named” private corporate offices—Mall Cops and commercial mercenaries– who are charged with enforcement of “codes, regulations, and statutes” that apply only to the franchises and employees and officers of their respective (and often different) corporations.
Throughout much of America, nobody is being paid to mind the store or provide enforcement of the Organic and Public Laws anymore. So, now does it make sense why you have no access to the guarantees of The Constitution and no enforcement for the indictments of Common Law Grand Juries?
To get action and enforcement you have to have a Common Law Sheriff operating the land jurisdiction of your county, and you also need an entire Common Law Court backing him up.
There are basically three possibilities—
1. Cause enough ruckus so your county votes to dissolve the “County” corporation and operate in its correct jurisdiction—- this is unlikely because they will want to cling to the “federal funding” — i.e., kick-backs from the fraud.
2. Convince the “Sheriff” of Your County as in “Sheriff of Jackson County” to also accept the duty of Jackson County Sheriff (the Sheriff on the Land position) and also enforce the Organic and Public Laws —- wear both the “incorporated” and the “unincorporated” hats. That has been done and it has been proven to be correct by the Mack/Printz v. USA case in the US Supreme Court. It used to be taken for granted that the Sheriff occupied both the private corporate “law enforcement” office and the Public Office, but nowadays they are too bedraggled and dumbed-down to know the difference, and since the incorporated “Counties” want a free wheel to plunder and do what they like, far too many “Sheriffs” have gone along and taken orders and failed to serve the Public Office or enforce the Organic and Public Law.
Sheriff Richard Mack and Joe Arpaio are examples of men who have honorably worn both hats.
3. Do an end-run around the incorporated County. Just write them off as foreign “code enforcers” who are there to police foreign corporations and Federal United States Citizens and make sure that is all they do, too. Meantime, marshal up the living people of your county via a Public Notice of a Public Meeting to form an unincorporated body politic—- a free association of landowners—- sign and witness your Declaration of Political Status reclaiming your birthright estate and political status established on the land jurisdiction of your native state— and begin educating people. Explain that our hired help— the “federal corporation” and its employees— defrauded us back in 1933 and that a second such corporation is now attempting to do the same thing. Explain that as a result of this chicanery their political status as been changed to that of a British Crown Subject and that the Public Offices their county is owed have all been converted to private corporate offices instead—- leaving the Public Offices vacated since 1976. As a result we have no real Sheriff operating the land jurisdiction of the County and enforcing the Organic and Public Laws— The Declaration of Independence, The Articles of Incorporation, The Constitution for the united States of America, The Northwest Ordinance, and United States Statutes-at-Large. They have to elect from among themselves a whole different slate of candidates to fill the actual Public Offices. Once those people are elected, bonded, and sworn in, your Sheriff will have a complete American Common Law Court to back him up and he will have the sweeping enforcement powers he is owed as the top peacekeeping officer of the land. He will be able to deputize as many men as he needs to enforce the Organic and Public Law— just like John Wayne in the old movies.
See this article and over 100 others on Anna’s website here:www.annavonreitz.com
January 13th, 2016 by olddog
By Ron Ewart
January 13, 2016
“If you own rural land, the government and the environmentalists want it and intend to take it, regardless of your property rights engraved in the U. S. Constitution.” Ron Ewart
In our recent article entitled “Secession or War – American West Against the East”, we described what was going on with those that run this country in the East being in direct conflict with those who live in the West. This festering conflict has led to the Bundy Ranch armed standoff in Nevada in 2014 and now the Hammond Ranch armed standoff in Southeastern Oregon by the Bundy-led militia. The reader might wonder how did we get to this point where guns became necessary to protect property rights?
Since the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1969, the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 (EPA) and finally the Endangered Species Act in 1973 (ESA), a radical environmental mindset has invaded America like a rapidly metastasizing disease. This environmental disease has become so pervasive you can find it in all of government, in our public schools, our colleges, the courts, the news media and even corporate America has become a victim. Elements of this environmental disease are woven subtly into commercial advertising. The EPA, the BLM, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife, the U. S. National Forest and the U. S. Interior agencies became the unrelenting, Gestapo-like enforcement arm for NEPA and the ESA.
One year prior to the passage of the Endangered Species Act in 1972, the United Nations held an “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro from which Agenda 21 was born. Most of the world nations signed off on Agenda 21, including that great conservative president, George H. W. Bush, on behalf of the American people. In reality, Agenda 21 was and is nothing more than an outright, open declaration of war on American constitutionally protected private property rights, driven by radical environmentalism and social justice.
Then in 1976 the United Nations held a “Declaration of Human Settlements” conference in Vancouver, Canada where international environmental, land use and socialist policies where laid out and established as permanent guidelines. The following paragraph was taken directly from the policy paper coming out of the Vancouver conference.
Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in human settlements, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. Social justice, urban renewal and development, the provision of decent dwellings-and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole.
The UN preamble flies in the face of American property rights and the U. S. Constitution. The UN is not America’s friend but it maybe too late to do anything about it. The U. S. Government and all state and local governments have adopted this preamble and Agenda 21 either in part or in whole and they have passed laws to implement them. States, counties and cities have even adopted international building, utility and environmental codes. The one-world-order was institutionalized into American law years ago, right under our collective noses.
President Clinton established the Council on Sustainable Development in June of 1993 to further integrate Agenda 21 policies into American law. The American Planning Association has adopted many of the tenets of Agenda 21. Those tenets end up in city and county land use comprehensive plans all over America. This disease of radical environmentalism has propagated rapidly and is now completely institutionalized into the American system of law. Were you ever asked to offer an opinion on these environmental changes to law, or attend a public hearing? Hardly! Your “representatives” just did it, unilaterally. Only environmentalists and government employees came to the public hearings.
What is the result of all this environmental national and international gerrymandering? Powerful and very wealthy environmental groups have sprouted up all over America. NEPA, ESA and the EPA rules have given these environmental groups a feeding ground of federal law allowing them to sue the government every time the government violates its own laws. The government violates its own laws all the time. The environmentalists win most of the time and with each win they reap multi-million dollar awards of your tax dollars and become even wealthier. In addition, wealthy philanthropists donate millions to environmental groups. Meanwhile, freedom and property rights groups like NARLO are starved of the funds necessary to keep up their fight to preserve the Republic.
One such radical environmental group is the Center for Biological Diversity (CFBD). They have become filthy rich suing the government over the Endangered Species Act (ESA). First, they research species to find if any species are threatened or endangered according to “their” science. Then they send a list of what species they think that may be threatened or endangered to the ESA and demand they be listed. If the government doesn’t list the species within the ESA regulations, CFBD sues the government. CFBD wins all the time because the courts have an environmental bias.
We have seen this bias first hand in a court case against a private property owner near Tacoma. WA. The judge openly displayed his environmental bias in the court transcripts. The man was sent to jail for 6 months and fined $20,000 for cleaning out a ditch on his own property. When he cleaned out the ditch the ditch wasn’t in a wetland. The land use authorities declared it a wetland after the fact and charged him with a crime that did not exist. The judge was intent upon making an environmental example out of this hapless landowner who had done nothing wrong.
But let’s get back to the Center for Biological Diversity and the armed stand off by the Bundy militia at the Hammond Ranch in Southeastern Oregon. Shortly after the Bundy standoff commenced, the CFBD issued the following statement in their newsletter.
“The armed men who took over a federal building in southeastern Oregon are part of a long-running campaign of violence, intimidation and extremist paranoia that has festered for decades in the West over the issue of public lands — the previous standoff made in 2014 by Cliven Bundy in Nevada. Among the demands at the latest standoff is to shut down Oregon’s Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, which provides crucial protections for wildlife — especially birds that migrate through the area.
Members of the men’s group have said they’re willing to kill and be killed if necessary.
“This is the latest in a long string of armed, right-wing thugs attempting to seize America’s public lands and enact their paranoid, anti-government dream bought by guns and intimidation,” said the Center for Biological Diversity’s Kierán Suckling. “What’s happening in Oregon is a logical outgrowth of right-wing rhetoric that demonizes even the concept of federal land — places like national parks and forests — and villainizes those who believe that publicly owned land should be more than just a source of profit for ranchers and corporations.”
Examining these statements by CFBD reflects an extreme environmental bias and total ignorance of private property rights. Their use of “campaign of violence, intimidation and extremist paranoia” and “thugs” rhetoric subverts the principles upon which these armed patriots stand. They are constitutional principles, not some fly-by-night trivia.
Since the mid 1960’s national and international (UN) radical environmental policies have come in direct conflict with American constitutional principles. Environmental policies have won. The EPA, BLM and the US Fish and Wildlife are owned and operated, lock, stock and barrel, by environmental zealots. Local and state governments are staffed by environmentally brainwashed educated idiots from liberal colleges.
The Bundy Ranch armed standoff in 2014 and the current Hammond Ranch standoff in Oregon have been triggered by the freedom-robbing disease of radical environmentalism. Contrary to what the news is reporting, the current Bundy militia in Oregon DO NOT want to overthrow the government. They want constitutional justice for all rural landowners. Listen to what the Bundy standoff is really all about from KrisAnne Hall, a constitutional attorney, at this link.
These men and women and millions of rural Americans have seen the steady, unconscionable and unconstitutional erosion of the basic rights of property ownership in America and they have had enough. There is no alternative left for them but to draw a line in the sand.
We ask all of our readers to say what they would do if the government reached in without legal authority and took your home and your livelihood away from you, or burned your home down? What if they charged you with a trumped up crime and threw you in jail for five years? Would you just stand by and do nothing? It is way past time for rural landowners to stand up and lay it on the line.
The Bundy militia has done just that. They are the catalyst to light one big giant “brush fire” across the West. We hope they do.
The Bundy Ranch militia in Nevada in 2014 and now the armed standoff in Oregon is a direct threat to radical environmentalists and they know that if the rural landowner movement catches on, the “cat is out of the bag” and their political and financial power will start drying up, literally at the point of a gun. The Founding Fathers did not insert the Second Amendment into the Bill of Rights for hunting.
Although we do not support lawless acts, nevertheless, as a national advocate for rural landowners (NARLO) for the last 10 years, we applaud and support the Bundy militia standoff because they and we speak for rural landowners everywhere. We urge all Americans who believe in the principle causes of these brave men to send them well wishes. They need to know the people are behind them so that they can endure what is certain to come their way at the hands of the federal government, egged on by environmentalists like the CFBD. Send your well wishes addressed to Ammon Bundy, Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, 36391 Sodhouse Lane, Princeton, OR 97721. Do it today.
But the longer the Bundy militia occupy the federal building on the nature preserve in Oregon, the urgency rises for an armed engagement by an overwhelming federal military force against a puny militia. They may be “hit” before this article is in print. There are indications of a Special Ops Force headed to Oregon. Who will win is already pre-ordained. The potential for another Ruby Ridge or Waco to take place on American soil is possible, where the people, standing up for constitutional principles, are taken down by the government that is criminally, morally and constitutionally in the wrong.
If you really want to know the truth about the BLM vs. Hammond Ranch story, we strongly recommend that you listen to Greg Walden’s impassioned testimony on the floor of the U. S. House of Representatives. Walden is an Oregon Republican U. S. Congressman that represents the district where the Hammond’s live and he personally knows the Hammond’s. Watch the Video.
Now the reader might get the idea that we are anti-environment. Just the opposite is true.
The National Association of Rural Landowners’ (NARLO) motto is:
“Protecting the environment is laudable.
Trashing the Constitution to do it, is treasonous!”
The truth is, rural landowners are far better stewards of the land than ineffective, hopelessly corrupt government agencies that collude with national and international radical environmentalists to steal constitutionally protected property rights. The stories of government mis-management of federal lands are legendary and have caused billions of dollars in property and environmental damage. Need we mention EPA’s release of toxic substances into a Utah river from a mine they were managing? That release polluted an entire river drainage area all the way to the Colorado River. Did anyone get fired or go to jail? Of course not. It’s government.
Ladies and gentlemen, the brutal reality is that only a ground swell of national rural outrage, like the Bundy militia, will reverse the course of socialism and environmental extremism in America and return us to a Constitutional Republic. Farmers, ranchers and rural landowners can and should be the catalyst to incite that outrage because they are being required to bear the entire burden of environmental protection, while city folk get off scot-free. Rural landowners own the ‘land’ and the ‘land’ is their power, if they will use that power ……. before they lose it.
The NARLO website is a treasure trove of information for rural landowners. If you are a rural landowner, you owe it to yourself to investigate the hundreds of articles, valuable information and tools that exist there. Tell us your story and we will devote our weekly column to it. We even have developed a sample petition to help citizens in counties and cities to demand their city or county cancel the contracts with the United Nations International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). The petition is contained in Section “A”, Chapter A3 of NARLO’S Rural Landowner Handbook.
ICLEI consults with American cities and counties on how to plan for sustainable development and smart growth under the guidelines of Agenda 21 (1972 & 2012) and the Conference on Human Settlements, established in Vancouver in 1976. ICLEI is a Trojan Horse for international environmentalism and is an enemy of freedom and American constitutional property rights. Either fight this radical environmental monster or watch America slide into third world status where freedom and property rights are dictated by a King, or an Absolute Democrat Monarchy.
© 2016 Ron Ewart — All Rights Reserved
Ron Ewart, a nationally known author and speaker on freedom and property issues and author of his weekly column, “In Defense of Rural America”, is the President of the National Association of Rural Landowners, (NARLO) (http://www.narlo.org) a non-profit corporation headquartered in Washington State, an advocate and consultant for urban and rural landowners. He can be reached for comment at firstname.lastname@example.org.
January 7th, 2016 by olddog
By Jack Mullen |
Gun-free zones are a magnet for those who want to kill many people quickly. Even the most ardent gun control advocate would never put “Gun-Free Zone” signs on their home. Let’s stop finally putting them elsewhere. – John Lott Jr.
Theorem: There are NO GUN FREE ZONES
“Gun Free Zones” are bounded regions where law abiding people are not allowed to be armed – formally being disarmed before entering. Gun Free Zones in Public Spaces (GFZPS) are a violation of the Constitution for the United States, violate many State Constitutions, and, more importantly, violate Natural Law.
The fundamental law is the foundation of our society. In the United States of America, it is the U.S. Constitution. Through this document, our fundamental rights are secured and protected against infringement by the federal government and by the State governments, because the States are also parties to this contract. – Paul Andrew Mitchell, “The Federal Zone”
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. [16 Am. Jur. 2d, Section 177; later 2d, Section 256]
The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it, which obliges every one, and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions. The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but to have only the law of Nature for his rule. John Locke
Gun Free Zones in Public Spaces are dangerous and, like cancer, can become a pathological process spreading ever widening areas, including cities, parks, government occupied buildings and properties. It can further metastasize over whole public regions including counties and States.
COMPETITION FOR PEACE AND SECURITY
Competition is a sin, therefore you must destroy it. John D. Rockefeller
The theory of natural monopoly is an economic fiction. No such thing as a ―natural monopoly has ever existed. The history of the so-called public utility concept is that the late 19th and early 20th-century ―utilities competed vigorously, and like all other industries, they did not like competition. They first secured government-sanctioned monopolies, and then, with the help of a few influential economists, they constructed an ex post facto rationalization for their monopoly power. . . . The theory of natural monopoly is a 19th-century economic fiction that defends 19th-century (or 18th-century, in the case of the U.S. Postal Service) monopolistic privileges and has no useful place in the 21st-century American economy. – June 14, 1995 at the CATO Institute conference examining the question Postal Service in the 21st Century: Time to Privatize? DiLorenzo, Thomas J.
It is an axiom: competition for solutions in the markets of human action produce outcomes maximizing the values which support mankind’s life and happiness.
Competitive forces maximize truth and transparency, while actively and invisibly minimizing deception, fraud and dissimulative activities which drain and dissipate the resources originally available for the problems.
Values necessary for human survival include Peace and Security, without out either, mankind cannot evolve as a community and in the long term he cannot exist.
Gun Free Zones reduce competition for peace and security. Proceeding with an analogy from economics, GFZPS have the same effect as cartel created monopolies, unnatural and forcibly defended barriers against competitors deliberately erected around lucrative high demand products such as medical drugs (legal) and recreational drugs (illegal), and services, such as the provision of security via police forces and law enforcement.
Unable to maintain their government-granted monopoly, the powerful railroad interests turned to government to do the regulating and price-fixing which they were unable to do themselves. In fact, the pressure that induced Congress to enact the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 did not come from reformers bemoaning abuses by the powerful railroad interests; it came from the railroad interests themselves, asking Congress to shield them against the harsh winds of competition. – THE BUSINESS END OF GOVERNMENT (1973). Dan Smoot
Forcibly defended monopolies mean the only people and groups allowed to provide and profit from the monopolized products, or services, are cartel members (corporate or criminal gangs) or Government created gangs (police forces.) In the case of gun free zones, the only people carrying weapons (illegally) are criminals. Criminals of course are not bound by the laws of a monopoly because all observance of law is a voluntary decision and criminals do not, by definition, voluntarily observe the law.
THE IDEA OF A GUN FREE ZONE IS MAGICAL THINKING: MANY PEOPLE ARE ARMED IN GUN FREE ZONES
In a monopoly controlled Gun Free Zone, there still exists a market for peace and security, but market forces are nullified creating a vacuum of competing solutions which would provide life maximizing results. In this situation, cartel members and criminals are given exclusive control of peace and security and yet neither group has any personal concern or investment for return in those values. Legally armed cartel members are concerned with law abiding people remaining disarmed and criminals are also concerned with law abiding people remaining disarmed, however for the different reason of increasing their chances of committing lowered risk further crime. This is common sense and is consistent with natural law.
Natural Law can be discovered and even understood and it can only be violated at some cost. In the case of an individual’s ability to maximize his peace and security, Natural Law is clear, the Individual must be fully self-responsible, ie., he or she must be a competing market provider of peace and security, primarily focusing on preserving protecting their own.
Competition, properly so-called, rests on the activity of separate, independent individuals owning and exchanging private property in the pursuit of their self-interest. It arises when two or more such individuals become rivals for the same trade. Ayn Rand
However as an individual provides for his own peace and security and brings his solution to the market, others will too, and must, bring their solutions thereby maximizing the number of competitive solutions providing peace and security. As the number of armed people increases, the incidence of violence and crime, inversely, is reduced. In an invisible way, crime and anti-life activity is minimized for all as the number of competing solutions for peace and security increase.
COMPETETIVE MARKET IN WEAPONS
In the case of weapons it’s also axiomatic that to support the Natural Law of competing solutions maximizing peace and security, there must be a competitive market of weapons available to competitors. It would be an unnatural (monopolized) market if only criminals and cartel members could be armed with the most powerful or technologically superior weapons. Again, criminals and unbalancing agents of the enforced monopoly would have a competitive edge in this market and peace and security would again be reduced if there were not competitive weapons available to everyone in the market.
Thus it is important to recognize: calls for reducing or eliminating your access to the best possible weapons technology of the day, are really a deceptive call to unbalance the market for peace and security and place you at a disadvantage in terms of maximizing your peace and security.
Gun Bans and Restrictions on Weapons Are Market Destabilizing
Cartels and monopolies of force are often created as a result of criminal elements having eliminated or usurped third party representatives formerly considered to be functioning to increase your peace and security.
The Constitution of the United States, acting as a clarifier and preserver of Natural Law, explicated the Natural Law of Self
Defense. The Constitution did not make the Law, but was created to provide a legal framework wherein the government established by the document would have enumerated restrictions on how the government could legally act.
It’s clear that for a period of some years, the Constitution was a sufficient reminder and the court systems a sufficient deterrent against acting outside or in a manner inconsistent with Natural Law and the Laws restricting government action as codified in the Constitution.
But consistent with our understanding of how deception, fraud and unbalancing of coercion free markets is necessary for criminals, and those seeking enrichment not via successful and productive efforts but rather by enslaving or stealing from others, we can directly correlate the creation of monopolies in all profitable markets required by man with a violation of Natural Law (with costs distributed to all not benefitting from the monopoly) and hence violations of the Constitution for the United States.
The Constitution has now become powerless and no longer limits government action, but has been interpreted to limit the action of market actors; the market being all areas where men and women could and should rightly participate in commerce without coercive limitations on action.
One such area is in the market for peace and security. Criminals, now actually parties with legal rights or cartel rights inside the created monopolies, are restricting free and open competition for maximizing the values of peace and security.
It’s totally clear and fully transparent, gun free zones, proliferating in ever widening circles of enforcement, are spaces being made safe and for criminal activity, keeping in mind, criminals do not voluntarily recognize the legal restrictions of gun free zones.
Arming the people has the effect of creating competition in economic markets – With more and more people armed the competition for peace provides MAXIMUM PEACE. And by way of economic principles, it is not the actual competition (outwardly carrying guns) that reduces violence, but rather it is the threat of competition (possible conceal weapons on everyone) — the threat of people everywhere competitively armed – that reduces the violence and cost.. It is common sense and natural law.
We are now witnessing the government acting in a manner that is consistent with favoring criminals, unbalancing the market and institutionalizing violence and predation.
STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM
History records time and time again, institutions organizing, at first in service or as representatives for individuals acting in a way supposedly beneficial to individuals. This usually starts out as a system of providing quasi-market solutions for problems individuals find troublesome or uncomfortable creating solutions.
However, over time, criminal elements, psychopaths and their sycophants will begin to infiltrate and then escalate the number of services provided. Slowly at first, market solutions for many common problems are eliminated as government offers solutions sold as better than competitive services can provide.
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. – Adam Smith
This process easily continues as people, especially European people , (read about white Pathological Altruism), are very trusting and readily handover responsibilities and tasks they find troublesome, labor intensive, or otherwise not pleasurable.
Over time these governments, Monarchies, or any system of controlling people begin to use fear, intimidation and the invention of problems for which they can provide monopoly solutions. Costly solutions that ultimately reduce peace and security as their veiled goal is really predation on those unbalanced toward a weaker position in the market place of human action.
But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. Adam Smith
State Sponsored Terrorism is a natural and typical act of a fully evolving criminal, mentally ill, control system which attempts to surround populations in monopolies of force, eventually creating total gun free zones inside their nations, while terrorizing the people into giving up their competitive positions and, as criminals, preying on the unprotected individuals across all perceived dimensions of wealth and value.
These governments and their masters know peace and security are increased by individual competitors, using the most competitive weapons technology available, freely offering (un-coerced) competitive solutions in the marketplace.
Therefore, the only logical conclusion to be drawn is, the Government intends to do violent crimes against the people and naturally must reduce the number of firearms in the hands of the people to accomplish this goal.
State Sponsored Terrorism is nothing more than marketing, albeit ruthless, often bloody, and always immoral, by a control system in support of a monopoly in the market of solutions and services offering peace and security
Governments, collectivized gangs and pockets of mentally ill crime syndicates must still compete in the social and economic market place of human action in order to gain market share and market control. This is a fact most don’t understand, much or all of the evil and injustice done by one group to another is done with permission, either overtly or covertly via tacit acceptance of the products, services and contracts of an illicit defacto control system.
It’s not until, an organization within a market obtains a corner on the market that they can evolved into a fully coercive tyranny, closing the doors to any competition and then gouging takes places in areas of important services. This explains why the Obama Regime must continuously create false flag shootings in order to gain American’s permission to begin the process of disarming. After a certain number of people provide support for the idea, the monopoly will have enough power to force its barriers around all peoples: Time is short.
Gun Free Zones are the safe spaces where State sponsored terrorism can exist mostly unimpeded.
Gun Free Zones are action zones, State actors and criminal actors artificially causing market unbalancing legal restrictions on people’s ability to protect themselves. In the end, as all people are disarmed, the worst personality traits begin to monopolize the positions of authority in the control system until, a mentally ill monopoly of force begins its most egregious acts of terrorism, theft, rape and mass murder. This has been explored as the concept of Pathocracy wherein, organizations begin to populate with similar minded, mentally ill or psychopathic personality traits.
Communism is such a political system and, over its nearly 200 years of implementation, every expression of this malignant political system has exhibited mentally ill and psychopathic behaviors leaving misery and wealth destruction as its legacy.
When a government or system of control begins to demand it provide solutions for peace and security, not voluntarily, and when concomitantly, peace and security are reduced with violent and escalating attacks on people and property (and always “advertised” via a public media circus) you must immediately recognize the danger; the control system is marketing a mentally ill system of control.
At this moment in time we have an emergency situation. The acts of Terrorism against the people, ie., Oklahoma City bombing, 9-11, mass shootings like the Batman Movie Theatre shootings, with James Holmes or the Safeway Shooting with Jared Loughner, or the TOTALLY FAKED attacks like the Sandy Hook School Shooting and likely the Boston Bombing, and attacks which may have been faked like those recently in Paris and San Bernardino, **are only the beginning**. Because when the people can no longer provide for their own defense, then anything and everything will be done to them — history has shown.
ARGUMENTS FOR IRRATIONAL ACTORS
Many argue mass shooters are mentally ill and emotionally charged. Claiming such states of mind preclude rational thinking regarding the location of mass shooting. The Batman Shooter, James Holmes for example never mentioned in his notes or other clues the theatre’s ‘Gun Free Zone” policy had anything to do with his choice of venue for his “mass shooting”.
However, if one actually believes the Holmes shooting was not either encouraged, provocateured, engineered or otherwise influenced by State actors working toward an agenda of total disarmament of the American people, one has to realize by unintentionally choosing a “Gun Free Zone” Holmes was elevating his chances of not being shot while committing his crime. Further the death toll was statistically likely to be higher as a result of the “Gun Free Zone” location.
It was also claimed in a 2002 study right to carry laws have no effect on the location of a mass shooting (This study does not include recent data, refuting this claim.) But again, it is not the location a “right to carry” law should affect, it’s the elimination of a threat or shooting in progress that a Natural Law right to defend your life most certainly will affect.
Most Americans cannot wrap their head around the fact that most of the recent escalation of mass shootings is in some way influenced by the control system which is attempting to disarm Americans.
NATURAL LAW SOLUTIONS FOR REDUCING GUN AND OTHER VIOLENT CRIME
If the government actually cared about insuring the least number of causalities were caused by mass a shooting situation (or other violent crime), then it would have no choice but to recommend the Swiss system of arming and training all people to defend themselves.
Gun and weapons training could again be part of the education system and begin early in a child’s life resulting in self-assured less fearful people aware of the fact that a virtual police officer was everywhere – all the time – in the form of citizens equally armed and trained to respond.
Training people at a young age to use, respect and understand the importance and position, in a self-dependent individual’s life tool complement, is the most responsible, rational and mature way to ensure self-defense is a basic component of healthy state of mind and part of creating, from birth, healthy and self-dependent personality traits.
This system naturally reduces violent crimes, rapes, robberies, while minimizing damage due to mentally ill shooters who are not motivated to save their own lives in first place.
Creating a state of dependency in which others are to stand up for your life and to be available in your instantaneous moment of need is childish thinking; the magical thinking of an undeveloped state of consciousness. This is a condition deliberated created by those planning to exploit this vulnerability; public education is culpable and complicit in the devolution of adult states of mind.
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin
Clearly Natural Law requires adult people take responsibility for their own lives, otherwise third parties, who are under no obligation to risk their lives for yours, will convince you to transfer your self-responsibility to them in exchange for protection. Transferring self-responsibility to another makes you a ward, a slave, beholden to another for your physical safety and, by induction, anything similar to safety, eventually transferring responsibility for whole classes of actions you are no longer rightfully allowed to take.
SILLY ARGUMENTS THAT GUNS IN HANDS OF THE PEOPLE DO NOT STOP TYRANNY
Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives. James Madison
There are many that argue (supporting their oppressors) guns in the hands of militias and the people could not have stopped the absolute torturous blood bath of the mentally ill Bolsheviks set loose on Russia by the European and American Jewry and other genocides prosecuted against defenseless peoples.
In the myopic article called Militia Myths the author makes the claim: A historical analysis reveals that Militias are typically the gateway to tyranny, not the safeguard against it. A heavily armed population has little to no bearing on preventing tyranny. and then gives examples of nations using a militia to throw off foreign aggressors only to create some new form of dictatorship afterwards. He cites examples of the liberating militias degenerating into tyrannies in countries like Vietnam, Afghanistan, Cuba, Somalia, Iraq, and southern Lebanon. The rest of the article makes similar claims about Bolshevik Russia and other nations where blood baths resulted when unarmed and untrained peoples fell victims to violent psychopaths.
The article referenced above is written by a person with absolutely no understanding, or apparent education regarding the psychologies and personality types of nations, races and cultures. Nations structured around forms of social heirarchy, having no long standing, historical and institutionalize protection of values, such as property rights, contract law, Individualism, Natural Law and other mainly Western values, as codified in common law principals, cannot be expected to create new governments or ruling bodies based on those values. Western culture (European white cultures) have for hundreds of years had an enlightened system of law and justice based on the Natural Law ideas of
1) Do all you have agreed to do – which is the basis of contract law;
2) Do not encroach on other persons and their property – which is the basis of criminal and tort law. Richard Maybury
Additionally, nations and their peoples with NO HISTORY of identifying and enshrining moral philosophical values preserving individual rights OR isolating governments from assimilating a religious dogma as part of its system of law, cannot expect some liberating internal militia to afterward “promote a Free State”. Again, this is childish or magical thinking, resulting in the formation of conclusions which are harmful to rational thought regarding maintaining peace and security and minimizing despotism, tyranny and mentally ill systems of control.
The cultures and governments of the East and, in fact, isolated and heavily influenced by Eastern immigrants, Czarist Russia, did not or do not possess a law based on Scientific Law, or Natural Law, but rather on Political law. As Richard Maybury aptly points out:
POLITICAL LAW IS BASED ON POLITICAL POWER.
It has no requirement for logic or morality. It changes whenever the political wind changes. Fickle and tangled, no one can completely understand it…. You do whatever the power-holders say, or else. Right or wrong.
This type of social structure will not allow or promote a system enabling individuals to grow and advance with an understanding of their right to self-defense and protection of their own property. To expect a “Free State” to just manifest after an untrained, either morally or philosophically, militia or organization of peoples with guns, throw off a given tyranny is just plain silly.
But in fact, Americans, mostly educated (as the educational system has been hobbled and purposely dumbed down) in a system of property rights, contract law, and the moral values of individualism, could easily and handily throw off tyrants and still retain the knowledge and understanding of how to reconstituted a system based on those principles of property rights, contract law and the common law (Natural Law) tenets of individual rights.
A skilled common law judge would try to make all his decisions logically consistent with the two fundamental laws. Common law was not only a private legal system, it was a scientific one. Abraham Lincoln considered `Euclid’s Geometry’ to be one of his most important law books; he studied it to be sure the logic of his cases was airtight.
One of the most important characteristics of common law was its certainty. It had evolved very carefully over many centuries, changing little from one decade to the next. The two fundamental laws remained always in place, a stabilizing force. The community could expect their legal environment to remain reasonably orderly. Richard Maybury]
It has been shown repeatedly armed citizens reduce causalities or prevent mass shootings.
The question for the American people, and not the usurped Federal or State Governments, is one of third party trust. Can
American’s expect their governments to protect them? Can American’s in light of all of human history, expect their governments to not become immoral, corrupt or tyrannical? Do Americans feel safe, even as their governments invite mostly fighting age males from Eastern nations having no moral or philosophical training or upbringing in the ways of a Limited Republic or a religiously unconcerned system of control based on common law, including property rights and individual rights? Do American’s feel safer disarmed as their own country is being overrun by criminals, former terrorists, rapists and people with other undesirable characteristics, a people that are not going to assimilate and become Western, but are rather going to struggle non-stop to make America more Eastern.
Will Americans feel safer disarmed as a financial collapse of proportions never experienced in America, deliberately caused by the financial looting of a criminal banking system and the vitiated corporate monopolies they licensed, creates armies of hungry, homeless and outraged people forced to take to the streets looking for answers and shelter from the banker’s caused financial nuclear winter?
The Government, their corporate masters and the criminal banking families behind them all are desperate to be sure Americans do not throw off their intended tyranny and restore a Natural Law system of government and reinvigorate the moral justice system that was once America and finally come after those who have attempted, with extreme hubris, to collapse civilization and rebirth it into a deformed, mentally ill, fledging New World Tyranny.
MY CONCLUSION: Hold On To Your Guns Like Your Life Depends On Them.
Please read more than once as Mr. Mullen’S make this situation clear as a bell. If you want something done your way, doing it yourself always works. Never trust a government, as history proves they always screw the people. Be ready and capable of defending your life no matter where you may be.
January 6th, 2016 by olddog
In yesterday’s post titled, Obama Talks Martial Law, Texas Takeover, and Conspiracy Theory, you were introduced to just how sick a set of rules Obama plays by. There is not a moral or ethical fiber anywhere in his person. Just when it seemed like there was no one anywhere willing to stand up to the President who behaves like a 6th grade school girl, it turns out a whistleblower has stepped forward, somewhat reluctantly, and revealed that the plans of the New World Order, the Bilderberg’s, the Illuminati, etc., all of which obviously include Obama, are in for a serious smack down if what this whistleblower says is true. Based on how easily some of the information could be verified, and given who the host of the video below is, I’m going to take the man at his word at the very least for the portions involving the The International Court of Justice.
The interview begins with David Wilcock interviewing a remarkable new whistleblower, going by the name Drake for the time being. The subject of the interview is a series of mass arrests set to take place across the globe in the very near future, primarily in the G5 countries. The Interview is about two hours, but once Drake gets into the meat of the topic, the time flies. When I first began listening, I made the assumption the mass arrests being referred to would be the arrest of citizens with the potential to be“troublemakers,’ most likely from the Government “Threat List” Which Names 8 Million Americans To Be Detained As Soon As Martial Law Imposed!
I COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MORE WRONG!
THIS NEWS SHOULD LEAVE YOU REJUVENATED!
According to Drake, we are about to witness the largest coup in history, and those being arrested will be the global elites, or the New World Order, whatever you wish to call them. Until Drake’s testimony, the only media personality other than Wilcock who had referred to a mass arrest scenario of the global elites, has been Benjamin Fullford. Both have contacts both deep within the Pentagon at the highest levels. Wilcock’s source (again, a very senior official within the Pentagon) vetted Drake for over 4 hours, and concluded the story he tells in the interview below is 100% accurate. After all, Wilcock’s source should know, because the vast majority of the military is on board with this coup. The entire interviews is below, and I cannot suggest listening to it for yourself enough, but in the meantime I’ll do my best to summarize the whole thing as briefly as possible.
The name of the group that Drake has been affiliated with is called Freedom Reigns and you can find archived material at freedomreigns.us. The focus of Freedom Reigns, has been on the subject of Nation States, however it is important you realize that any group using the term Nation State as part of their name is a fraud. Freedom Reigns has no official group roster, no leader, no database, and no one knows everyone else involved, and that is done as a security precaution.
Much like I often refer to the American public as “Headline Readers and Soundbite Seekers,” because if the news doesn’t fit in a Tweet or on a bumper sticker, most people skip it, Drake Chastises the American people for becoming SO lazy that they’ve become incapable of vetting information for themselves when they hear it. Drake also chastises websites like mine, or like Alex Jones, accusing us of promoting “fear porn,” but until now, there was nothing to suggest the events we have been witnessing could be stopped. Because so many of us have been conditioned to cry Bullsh** no matter what we hear (and rightfully so most of the time), when events do being to unfold, Drake said the vast majority of people will mistake the military and those who ARE the good guys for our enemy, which is why is partly why he has come forward to speak now.
FOR MORE NEWS BY VOICE OF REASON CLICK HERE!
As I said up top, the main topic of the interview involves Nation States. Due to space constraints (you can always listen for yourself), I am going to fly through much of the legalease portion of how the majority of the United States have already declared their sovereignty and “disengaged” from the Corporation known as the United States of America, and they have done so rather slyly.
To make a long story short, a group traced the origins of all law as far back as the Sumerian tablets from roughly 11,000 years ago. That form of law was known as Ecclesiastic law, which later evolved into Cannon Law, and the combination of the two formed English Common Law, which our own system is based on. The group discovered that provided a piece of property is correctly registered and boundaries clearly discerned, representatives from the group habituating there can declare the land to be a sovereign nation. Without going into detail, the research team and legal scholars came to that conclusion.
Furthermore, all that is required to declare one’s land sovereign is notification to The International Court of Justice (French: Cour internationale de justice; commonly referred to as the World Court or ICJ) is the primary judicial branch of the United Nations. It is based in the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands. Its main functions are to settle legal disputes submitted to it by states and to provide advisory opinions on legal questions submitted to it by duly authorized international branches, agencies, and the UN General Assembly.
Once the notification process is complete, the sovereign nation becomes part of a publication, and gets listed by the U.N in an International Newspaper. Apparently, the first attempt was made in Pennsylvania, and upon getting their receipt back from The International Court of Justice, several very high ranking members of the Pentagon showed up asking questions.
The most pressing questions: Could it be done again all around the country? By the end of February 2015, The International Court of Justice had processed and already sent back receipts to the majority of U.S. States. Here is where things get extremely interesting. In order to be able to disengage from the Corporation of the United States of America, each sovereign nation had to have a Constitution, one that agreed with 1787 Constitution completely, it had to agree with original 13th Amendment, contain The Bill of Rights, The Articles of Confederation, and The Declaration Independence.
By declaration their sovereignty, disengagement, or their effort to remove themselves (individual states) from the corporate U.S. Government, it had the legal effect of rebirthing the Declaration of Independence which clearly states on Page 2 that if the government gets out of control, the people have the right to take care of the problem.
The manner and format of using those documents (original founding documents), in conjunction with a meeting of representatives of a representative state gave people the right to make the declaration for their independence. That, then gives them the authority, the civilian authority, to take actions as necessary to back up the civilian action taken, or in other words, defend itself. Not only did the majority of the states complete this process by February, but many of the Native American Indian Nations were included as well. As of right now, the majority of the United States has been set FREE from the corporate government legally, on an international basis. In the interest of space, you’ll have to trust me that is doesn’t conflict with the Constitution. Listen to the interview for the full details.
FOR MORE NEWS BY VOICE OF REASON CLICK HERE!
CHECK OUT THE NEW GOOGLE+ PAGE!
The final package with the majority of the states came at one time, and by the time the last few stages were playing out, the global elites had caught on. They did their best to stop the process, but were unsuccessful. According to Drake and the insiders at the Pentagon, IF martial law is declared, somewhere between 80-90% of the military has agreed to go AWOL.
Once the arrests begin, the precedent set will be for the civilians to control the military, the military controls the Federal Marshals, and the Federal Marshals support local law enforcement. Those actively involved in carrying out these arrests hope to disrupt daily life as little as possible, so martial law will not be declared, as no one expects much of a serious fight from the old crusty elites (my choice of words). At this point, the global elites have been so severely weakened financially, they could never come close to mounting an attack against actual law enforcement. For evidence of just how broke they are, one need not look farther than all the bailouts. They certainly did not do that out of the kindness of their hearts.
There is obviously a great deal more discussed in the interview, and in much deeper detail, so I encourage you to listen and share with a friend. Drake says that when the time comes, local broadcasting will be commandeered, and announcements will be made to cut down on the panic of the populace. If you listen to Benjamin Fullford or David Wilcock regularly, you know that their connections within the Pentagon are solid. Let’s all hope and pray for a safe and speedy end to this vaccination of our planet from all the filth that has ruled over it for centuries.
Whistleblower- Plan To Take Down NWO
Donald Trump recently entered the Syrian refugee debate and had some bold things to say about the crisis.
The Republican presidential front runner spoke with Fox News’ Eric Bolling on Cashin’ In about the issue. During the interview, Trump expressed his deep concern about potentially letting jihadists come into the country as “refugees.”
“They were talking about 3,000 people coming,” he told Bolling.
“Then I heard 10 [thousand], then I heard 25 [thousand], then I heard 200,000 people.”
“And Eric, if you look at this migration, it’s mostly men,” Trump said. “And they look like young men, and strong men, and they look like fighters.”
Trump said he wondered “why aren’t they fighting for their own country — Syria?”
He went on to say, “This could be one of the greatest military coups of all time.” Trump obviously wasn’t talking about a domestic military overthrow of the government, but a surprise attack from a foreign enemy, as indicated when he said, “Some of [the immigrants] definitely in my opinion will be ISIS.”
Trump warned that accepting refugees in our attempt at humanitarianism could be like accepting “a Trojan horse.”
Many migrants, including Islamic militants, would come to an unprepared United States.
He further pointed out that the United States is a “debtor nation” that owes $19 trillion, and our infrastructure is outdated.
“Obama wants to bring 200,000 people here,” Trump said. “[I]f I win the election, they are going back. They’re going back.”
Under a Trump administration, instead of transferring these migrants to European countries or the U.S., “free zones, safe zones” would be set up in Syria for these people.
Trump pointed out that the Persian Gulf states aren’t “accepting anybody.”
“And they are right there,” he said. “We have a big problem in this country.”
Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter and tell us what you think about Trump’s comments on the Syrian refugee crisis.
By Brandon Turbeville
A recent poll conducted by YouGov revealed that a sizable portion of the American public is open to the idea of a military coup in the United States. The poll was conducted amid the continual polling that takes place during the U.S. Presidential election yet it did not focus on the elections per se, but the potential lack of elections in the future.
The YouGov poll surveyed 1,000 people online and determined that 29% of Americans, over a quarter of the population, could imagine supporting a military coup against the civilian government. Only 41% could not imagine supporting a coup.
The numbers supporting a potential coup were highest among Republicans with 43% of them saying they could envision supporting a coup, 29% of independents followed, with Democrats trailing at 20%.
The numbers apparently increased in support when the question asked “whether they would hypothetically support the military stepping in to take control from a civilian government which is beginning to violate the constitution.”
Critics of the polls have suggested that the method used to conduct the survey was largely unscientific and not a reasonable representation of an accurate sampling of the general American public.
Regardless of how it was conducted, the real question here is “Why was this poll conducted in the first place?” Why are Americans being asked if they would support a military coup? After all, in the past, whenever a critic of the government would suggest such a possibility, that individual was laughed off the stage as being paranoid and hyperbolic. We are told military coups are not an option in the United States and, being the exceptional nation, we are outside of history. We are told that the very idea that a military coup could ever take place is laughable. So, why the poll?
Indeed, as the TWSP has asked, “Who commissioned it? Was it ordered up by a clique of ambitious and disgruntled military men eager to redeem their defeats on the battlefield with some kind of seizure of power here in the United States? Up to now, we do not know these answers.”
The question is thus: Are the American people being prepped to accept a military coup in the United States and the subsequent martial law that will almost inevitably follow such a seizure of power?
Was this poll conducted for the benefit of the oligarchs who would perpetuate this coup? Not likely, since the Pentagon and the Military-Government-Intelligence apparatus already has extravagant ways of knowing whether or not the American people are receptive to coups. Was it merely an exercise in predictive programming and trend setting polling data – the same method that is used in color revolutions – to create a sense of social consensus and promote the idea that the majority supports a specific idea?
But the United States is not the only country that has had talk of military coups as of late. Upon the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the UK Labor Party, a “senior serving general” opined that, if Corbyn was ever elected as Prime Minister, the military might simply remove him from power.
According to a report by the London Daily Mail,
“A senior serving general, speaking anonymously to the Sunday Times, said Mr. Corbyn’s victory has been greeted with ‘wholesale dismay’ in the army.”
e added: “There would be mass resignations at all levels and you would face the very real prospect of an event which would effectively be a mutiny.
‘Feelings are running very high within the armed forces. You would see a major break in convention with senior generals directly and publicly challenging Corbyn over vital important policy decisions such as Trident, pulling out of NATO and any plans to emasculate and shrink the size of the armed forces…
The Army just wouldn’t stand for it. The general staff would not allow a prime minister to jeopardize the security of this country and I think people would use whatever means possible, fair or foul to prevent that. You can’t put a maverick in charge of a country’s security.’”
Corbyn’s plans and “reforms” are relatively mild on many accounts. However, that is apparently enough to justify the seizure of total power by the military in the minds of some. It also echoes the past claims by retired Army Gen. Paul E. Vallely, a friend of accused pedophile and avowed Satanist Michael Aquino, that he had answered a call asking if he would lead a coup against the civilian government if he were provided with 250,000 marines. Vallely responded that, yes, he would indeed lead a coup if the conditions were right.
While it remains to be seen what plans are being set in motion for the future of civilian governments in the United States and the UK, it is greatly concerning that convenient polls regarding military coups are being conducted and disseminated amongst the public while serving and retired military officials talk openly of the same act of treason. As discontent grows with higher unemployment, increased immigration, more foreign wars, higher food prices, and lower living standards, it is apparent that the ruling elite in both the United States and the UK – actually one and the same – are preparing to ensure that such discontent will be crushed and that no reforms, however modest, will ever be allowed to move forward.
Americans and British people must understand what is at stake before it is too late.
This whole plan sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me!
There is no way in hell they can set up a secure communication network. Which is the most important attribute in any war. And I would not trust General Valley any further than I could throw him.
January 5th, 2016 by olddog
A look at the role of the U.S. in a dismal year marked by war and violence
By Ben Norton
The year 2015 was marked by violence and war. The most prevalent story in the U.S. media throughout the year was ISIS. The Paris attacks, mass shootings, police brutality, terrorism, the Charleston massacre and the refugee crisis were also among the top 10 stories of the year.
The U.S., as the world’s leading military power, played an important role in much of this violence and war. In some cases, the U.S. directly participated in armed conflicts. In others, it played a supportive role, providing weapons and other forms of aid to warring parties. Although it has just 5 percent of the global population, the U.S. sells more than half of the world’s weapons.
The numerous wars throughout the Middle East, South Asia and North Africa can seem complicated, because of the variety of different forces involved. The following is a guide to 10 of the major armed conflicts in which the U.S. was involved in 2015.
U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan (Credit: Reuters/Parwiz Parwiz) Reuters/Parwiz Parwiz
President Obama promised countless times he would end the war in Afghanistan by 2014. He was reelected on the promise — which he subsequently broke, twice, instead further entrenching the U.S. military occupation of the South Asian country.
In 2014, the Obama administration announced that it would not just be delaying U.S. withdrawal; it would in fact also be expanding the U.S. role in the war. In 2015, the Obama administration said U.S. troops would remain in Afghanistan until 2017.
Some politicians, including Sen. John McCain, have called for a permanent U.S. military presence in the country, which has geostrategical importance, will be part of the TAPI natural gas pipeline, and contains trillions of dollars worth of natural resources.
The U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001. More than 220,000 Afghans were killed in the first 12 years of the U.S. war, according to a report conducted by Physicians for Social Responsibility.
Al-Qaida, which was isolated and weak when the U.S. war in Afghanistan began, has since grown exponentially, expanding into almost every country in the Middle East. Extremist Islamist groups like the Taliban have also regained strength and legitimacy under the U.S. military occupation, and ISIS has entered Afghanistan.
In October, the U.S. bombed a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, killing 30 people, including 14 hospital staff. A nurse who survived the attack said there “are no words for how terrible it was,” recalling “patients were burning in their beds.”
Washington’s story behind the attack changed numerous times and was full of contradictions. Despite numerous calls by Doctors Without Borders and the U.N. for an independent investigation, the U.S. refused to allow one.
Doctors Without Borders subsequently withdrew from Kunduz, leaving the entire region of northeastern Afghanistan without a large-scale hospital. The region has been taken over by the Taliban.
Iraqi soldiers fighting ISIS in northern Ramadi (Credit: AP) AP
Throughout 2015, the U.S. led a coalition of countries that are carrying out airstrikes on the self-proclaimed Islamic State.
A French journalist formerly held captive by ISIS has claimed that the U.S.-led bombing campaign is “pushing people into the hands of ISIS,” rather than weakening it. “Strikes on ISIS are a trap,” he warned. “We are just fueling our enemies and fueling the misery, the disaster, for the local people.”
American intelligence agencies and experts have admitted that the U.S.-led war in Iraq and Syria against ISIS is not effective, despite the Pentagon spending an average of $9.4 million every day on airstrikes.
Former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair apologized in 2015 for participating in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, which he admitted led to the rise of ISIS.
The U.S. government invaded Iraq in 2003, relying on allegations that dictator Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction — which officials later admitted was false. The U.N. asserted in no uncertain terms that the U.S. invasion was “illegal.”
Although the Bush administration falsely claimed Hussein had ties to al-Qaeda, the extremist group was not present in Iraq when the U.S. invaded. It was in fact that the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that led the once small yet now enormous al-Qaeda to spill into the country, and subsequently spread throughout the Middle East.
The U.S. support for brutal militias like the Wolf Brigades and a sectarian Shia-majority government further alienated the Sunni minority, radicalizing civilians and creating more sympathy for extremist groups.
At least 1 million people were killed in the U.S. war in Iraq, according to the aforementioned Physicians for Social Responsibility study. The report also notes that “this is only a conservative estimate.”
The U.S. military illegally occupied Iraq from 2003 to 2011. The Obama administration officially withdrew from Iraq in 2011. In 2014, however, with the rise of ISIS, the U.S. once again militarily intervened.
Today, vast swaths of Iraq are controlled by ISIS, one of the most heinous and violent groups to emerge since World War II.
The Kurds have also fought a war of independence in Iraq and northern Syria. Kurdish fighters, who are leftist, secular, and feminist, have relied to an extent on U.S.-led airstrikes, and have successfully liberated territory from ISIS.
Destruction in Syria (Credit: Reuters/Bassam Khabieh) Reuters/Bassam Khabieh
Civil war erupted in Syria in 2011. The armed conflict, which is still ongoing, and is now approaching its fifth year, has been nothing short of catastrophic.
4.4 million Syrian refugees are registered with the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. More than half of the population of Syria has been displaced in the ongoing war.
More than 250,000 Syrians have been killed in the conflict, and entire cities have been reduced to rubble, from constant government bombing and rebel fighting.
The Obama administration has called for the ouster of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, and has armed and trained anti-Assad rebels, yet reporting by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh shows that the Department of Defense has in fact simultaneously supported the Assad government — suggesting the U.S. government has continued a policy of backing both sides, similar to that it pursued in the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s.
Although the U.S. has supported a wide variety of armed rebel groups, it did not directly militarily intervene until the rise of ISIS, late in 2014.
U.S. allies, particularly Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar, have also supported extremist Islamist groups in Syria, including al-Qaeda affiliate al-Nusra.
Dozens of countries have fueled the Syrian civil war, along with non-state militant groups like Hezbollah. More than 30 countries are involved in the fight against ISIS in Syria and Iraq, including the U.S., Russia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, the U.K., Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, France, Canada, Australia, Morocco, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Spain and more.
Hundreds of civilians have also been killed in the U.S. and Russian bombing of ISIS in Syria and Iraq.
Rubble after Saudi-led coalition airstrikes in Yemen (Credit: Reuters/Mohamed
al-Sayaghi) Reuters/Mohamed al-Sayaghi
Since March, the U.S. has backed a Saudi-led coalition of Middle Eastern countries in their war on Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East.
Thousands of Yemenis have been killed in the war, including hundreds of children. Tens of thousands have been injured. An average of 25 Yemenis were killed every day throughout the nine-month war.
The Western-backed coalition seeks to reinstate President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi. It is fighting Houthi rebels, who have received some weapons and support from Iran — although the extent to which it has is disputed — and fighters loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. Hadi claims the Houthi rebels are puppets of Iran; the rebels characterize Hadi as a puppet of Saudi Arabia and the U.S.
Approximately two-thirds of civilian deaths and property destruction have been caused by the Saudi-led coalition, according to the U.N. Amnesty International has also reported that “more civilians have died as a result of coalition airstrikes than from any other cause during the conflict in Yemen.”
Leading human rights organizations have accused the U.S.-backed coalition of committing war crimes. Rights groups have called on the U.S. to stop providing the coalition with the weapons — including widely banned cluster munitions — they are using to carry out these atrocities.
The coalition has bombed hospitals, weddings, refugee camps, humanitarian aid warehouses, and two Yemeni Doctors Without Borders medical facilities.
The UAE and Qatar have also essentially invaded the country.
Rights groups warned in August that 80 percent of Yemen’s population —21 million people — desperately needed humanitarian aid. The U.N. warned in November that the “health and education systems in the country are on the brink of collapse.”
For years before the war broke out, the U.S. was carrying out a secret drone war in Yemen, which killed a large number of civilians, terrorizing and radicalizing the population. Scholars, intelligence officials, and journalists have argued that the drone war has only exacerbated extremism, and the U.N. says the U.S. killed more civilians with its drone strikes in Yemen than al-Qaeda.
The coalition-backed President Hadi approved and praised the U.S. drone war in his country.
Soldiers walk in Poraskoveyevka, eastern Ukraine (Credit: AP Photo/Sergei Grits) AP
More than 9,000 people have been killed in the ongoing war in eastern Ukraine, according to the U.N. At least 20,000 more have been injured.
In March 2014, Russia annexed Crimea, which was internationally recognized to be Ukrainian territory. Crimea has a Russian-majority population that voted in support of the annexation.
War subsequently broke out in the Donbass region of Ukraine. Ukrainian nationalists fought pro-Russian separatists throughout 2015.
The U.S. supports the Ukrainian fighters, some of which are neo-fascists, aligned with far-right ultra-nationalist parties like Svoboda and the Right Sector.
Ukraine and NATO characterize the war as the product of Russian aggression and illegal annexation of Crimea. Russia says it is responding to NATO encroachment. NATO originally said it would not expand eastward, but broke its promise.
Rubble and destruction in Gaza after Israel bombed the strip in its summer 2014 war
(Credit: AP/Adel Hana) AP/Adel Hana
An uprising in the occupied Palestinian territories and Israel broke out in October 2015. More than 100 Palestinians were killed by Israeli soldiers from October to the beginning of December. Nineteen Israelis were killed in the same time period.
The Palestinian uprising has been widely characterized as the “Third Intifada,” or the “al-Aqsa Intifada,” referring to the Jerusalem mosque around which much of the tension has flared. Some far-right Israeli groups and religious extremists want to destroy al-Aqsa, which is the third-holiest site of Islam and is also an important Jewish site, known as the Temple Mount, and reserve it solely for Jews.
Yet the conflict is not religious at its core. Many Palestinians are protesting the continued Israeli military occupation of the West Bank and the Israeli siege on Gaza.
Israel has illegally occupied the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, since 1967, in contravention of international law and scores of U.N. resolutions. In 2005, Israel partially withdrew from Gaza, but subsequently imposed a blockade on the strip that the U.N. has declared illegal. Today, international legal institutions have ruled that Israel still maintains “effective control” over Gaza, controlling its waters, airfield, electromagnetic field, and population registry.
The U.S. has steadfastly backed Israel throughout these past five decades. The U.S. considers Israel one of its most important allies, and has given the country more than $100 billion in military aid since 1967.
Washington continues to give more than $3 billion in military to Israel every year, and the Obama administration has considered increasing this.
Rubble after a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan (Credit: Reuters/Haji Mujtaba) Reuters/Haji Mujtaba
The U.S. has waged a drone war in Pakistan for more than a decade. From 2004 to 2015, the U.S. drone war killed up to 4,000 people in Pakistan, one-fourth of whom could have been civilians, according to data compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
The exact number of civilians killed in this war is unknown. According to the U.S. military, a “militant” is defined as a male of military age. This ambiguous definition makes it difficult to determine how many civilians are killed.
Secret government documents leaked to The Intercept by a whistleblower in 2015 show that 90 percent of people killed in U.S. drone strikes in a five-month period in provinces on Afghanistan’s eastern border with Pakistan were not the intended targets.
Former drone operators have said that the U.S. drone war in Pakistan is a “recruiting tool” for ISIS.
As a neighbor, Pakistan also plays an important role in the U.S. war in Afghanistan. The U.S. has maintained a relationship with the Pakistani government, ostensibly to fight extremist groups like the Taliban. At the same time, however, U.S. officials have admitted that Islamist extremist groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan receive funding from allied countries like Saudi Arabia.
In 2015, the U.S. continued its drone war in Pakistan, as well as in Yemen and Somalia.
Armed Mexicans in a self-defense council against drug gangs (Credit: AP/Eduardo Verdugo) AP
ISIS’ use of beheading as a military tactic has attracted a lot of media attention, but drug gangs and far-right paramilitaries in Central America have used such tactics for years. Some scholars have even gone so far as to claim that Central American drug gangs and far-right paramilitaries are worse than ISIS.
The drug war in Mexico in particular reached a new height in 2015. The U.S. has long worked with the notoriously corrupt Mexican government to fight drug gangs. In the process, not only have civilians been killed; the Mexican government has itself committed atrocities.
43 student activists from Ayotzinapa Rural Teachers’ College were kidnapped in Iguala, Guerrero, Mexico in September 2014. The government claimed the students were kidnapped by a drug gang, but many media reports have found government connections to the presumed mass killing.
Amnesty International blasted Mexican authorities in September 2015 for “a scandalous cover-up orchestrated by the highest levels of government.” The leading human rights organization called Ayotzinapa kidnappings “one of the worst human rights tragedies in Mexico’s recent history,” and said President Peña Nieto “will continue to be seen around the world as an enabler of horrors.”
Despite these documented atrocities, the U.S. gives well over $100 million per year in military and police assistance to the Mexican government, and even puts its own officials on the ground to work with it.
A February 2015 piece in the Nation asked, “Why Is the US Still Spending Billions to Fund Mexico’s Corrupt Drug War?”
In Colombia — where journalists, left-wing activists, and labor leaders are frequently killed, sometimes beheaded, by drug gangs and far-right paramilitaries — the U.S. also pursues similar policies.
The U.S. has a history of backing far-right paramilitaries and death squads in many Central American countries, particularly during the civil wars in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala.
Nigerian soldiers stand guard in Maiduguri, Nigeria (Credit: AP/Jon Gambrell) AP
The U.S. expanded military aid to the Nigerian government in 2015 and is working with it in its fight against Boko Haram, an extremist Islamist militia.
In 2015, Boko Haram declared loyalty to ISIS. Although more attention has been on ISIS, Boko Haram has carried out numerous massacres of civilians.
Boko Haram was in fact declared the deadliest terrorist group in 2015. In 2014, it killed more than 6,600 people, the vast majority civilians.
Although Boko Haram has committed ghastly atrocities, the Nigerian military is also known for kidnapping, torturing, and killing civilians.
Critics of the government say that, although Boko Haram is a brutal extremist militant group, it has in fact killed less people than the Nigerian military.
A street of debris and abandoned houses in Benghazi, Libya (Credit: AP/Mohamed Salama) AP
Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton helped push for the NATO bombing of Libya in 2011, which overthrow dictator Muammar Qadhafi and destroyed the government, leaving a power vacuum that is yet to be filled.
Amid the chaos, ISIS has expanded into Libya.
Throughout 2015, a variety of militant groups fought for control of the country. The internationally recognized government in the east is fighting ISIS affiliates in the north, along with more moderate Muslim Brotherhood-aligned rebels in the northwest, and tribal militias in the southwest.
The project Libya Body Count, which derives figures from compiling media reports, documented more than 4,300 deaths in 2015 and 2014.
Although the war officially ended in 2011, the U.S. has backed the Libyan government in the east.
Clinton was grilled by Republicans in 2015 for her role in the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, but what was ignored was that downtown Benghazi is in ruins, and swaths of the city are under the control of Ansar al-Sharia, an extremist Salafi Islamist militia that the U.S. considers a terrorist organization.
Ben Norton is a politics staff writer at Salon. You can find him on Twitter at @BenjaminNorton.
There is so much proof that these wars are for increasing Corporate profits and these corporations are controlled by the Banking Cartel with the objective of amassing trillions of dollars of profits from the theft of these countries natural resources, the war material profits, and the political control of nations everywhere on earth, so their objective of global domination can be achieved. With this in mind, I cannot justify Americans participating in their own subjugation, and having no other thought but instant gratification from high paying war jobs.
I remember an old man about ready to retire who worked where I did that said war was wonderful for our economy, and it was all I could do to refrain from beating him senseless. If he had been my age I would have wound up in jail.
Therefore, consider that this atrocity is only possible by the Bankers controlling our government, and the people don’t object to being controlled as long as they take home a pay-check.
Now, tell me this is something to be proud of! Is America so self centered that this is an acceptable legacy to give future generations of Americans? We are training our children to have no consideration for human life, and the results are going to be children killing their parents for their personal gain. This self centered society we are building will sooner or later bite us in the ass. It is a preplanned destruction of our self control, and a pathway to hell on earth.
STAND UP AMERICAN’S, AND TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY AND SELF RESPECT. SEND THE BANKERS TO HELL INSTEAD!
January 4th, 2016 by olddog
By Joshua Krause
After the San Bernardino shooting, the most pressing issue for progressives was closing the gun “loophole” that allows suspected terrorists to buy firearms. Specifically, they seem to think that people who have been flagged by the government, and placed on the no-fly list, should also be prevented from buying a gun. At first glance it makes sense. After all, why should suspected terrorists ever be allowed to buy a weapon?
However, it stops making sense the moment you take a look at what the no-fly list is, and what it entails. It also completely ignores the idea that people should never be punished for crimes they haven’t committed.
This is a list that contains millions of names. We don’t even know the exact number. We don’t know the country of origin for all these people. We don’t know how they got there, or what conditions and procedures were used to put them on the list. And we have no idea how anyone can ever get off the list. Everything about the no-fly list is a secret; and, more importantly, there is nothing judicial about it. There is no trial, judges or juries, and there is certainly no defending yourself. That’s because you don’t necessarily need to commit a crime to be on the list.
And that’s why banning gun ownership for individuals on the no-fly list should frighten gun owners. It creates a situation where you don’t have to do anything criminal to lose your rights. The government could determine any benign behavior to be a sign of terrorism, and promptly take your firearms. For all practical purposes, the Second Amendment would be dead.
However, it’s important to remember that the no-fly list ban isn’t alone. California recently passed a law that, while appearing unrelated to the no-fly list proposal, is actually operating with the same logic and intent.
A new California law scheduled to take effect Friday will allow the police to seize private, legally-owned weapons for up to three weeks without charges or allowing the citizen to contest the seizure.
AB1014 was passed last year in the wake of 2014’s Isla Vista shooting, where teenager Elliot Rodger went on a rampage near the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara, killing six people along with himself…
…Under the law, the factors a judge can consider in granting the restraining order include not only threats of violence, but also prior felony arrests (even without a conviction), evidence of alcohol abuse, and even the simple act of recently purchasing a gun or ammunition.
Once granted, police can use the restraining order to confiscate all of a person’s guns and ammunition, and the person is also barred from buying or possessing guns and ammo for the duration of the order. A full court hearing must then be heard within three weeks. At that hearing, a judge will be able to extend the restraining order for an entire year.
For now, this law won’t amount to anything for most gun owners. But it does set a dangerous new precedent. They’ve finally established the idea that it is okay to confiscate a weapon from someone who has never been convicted of a crime. It’s now perfectly okay in California, to violate someone’s fundamental rights based on nothing but vague suspicions and accusations.
But this probably won’t end with California. What we’re really seeing here is a two-pronged attack against the Second Amendment. Laws like this are an attempt to violate our rights at the state level, while the no-fly list proposals will be used to justify warrantless confiscations at the federal level. After failing to restrict gun ownership time and time again, the gun grabbers have found a new underhanded path for violating the Second Amendment.
The Covert Guide to Concealed Carry (Ad)
Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger
January 2nd, 2016 by olddog
Back in the mid sixties the local gun and booze puke came to my home gun shop for an inspection and after noticing a Remington XP100 I had restocked he announced his intention to seize it for being a too short rifle.
I advised him it was going to be very painful driving back to his office with it up his ass. Then, I showed him Remington’s catalog and explained to him as one would to a three year old, that it was the same pistol with a new Fancy Walnut thumbhole stock with the plastic rib removed, the barrel and action re-blued and a 3 to 9X long eye relief scope mounted on the action.
Needless to say, he agreed it would be very humiliating to have it removed from his anal cavity and excused himself and left; never to be heard from again, and I shot many a ground-hog over the next three decades and sold it for three times what it originally cost me. I could buy a good used car with what it would sell for today. It was still grouping under one inch at a hundred yards when I sold it. The Remington 221 Fireball is a great varmint round.
I have yet to understand why; he called to make an appointment if his objective was to find something wrong with the operation of my shop. Would a surprise visit not be more intelligent?
That was the day I woke up and figured out what kind of assholes were running my country.
Speaking of stupid: anyone working within the federal and State governments are the last people on earth qualified to control anything, let alone guns.
It was a couple of years later when the I.R.S. informed me I had to have a license to continue my hobby of restocking hunting rifles and custom checkering pistols, rifles and shotguns. I was never in the retail business.
I told him where to stick his license and continued working on my own weapons only. I would pay an obscene amount to buy back some of the guns I worked on for friends.
Back to gun control: and all of the insanity and lies that surrounds it.
I could make the reader weep with stories of ignorant gun users I have encountered over the years, but my real objective is exposing the tyranny of government gun control; while honestly acknowledging some people are too damn stupid to own a gun of any kind. But that is just them and not everyone! Should the government confiscate every ones cars and trucks just because some drunken turd ran over a congress-critter?
Has it ever occurred to the reader that there must be something more sinister behind the government’s great concern for the victims of their false flag murders? How about making damn sure no one can defend their self so they can feel safe and confiscate our weapons and not have to bury so many police officers and pay the family benefits! Just think of how much it would cost to equip all the police to confiscate everyone’s weapons; just to make the politicians feel safe.
Why don’t they feel safe? Could it be the fact that they know they are not a legitimate government and many American’s are finding out they are slaves to a bunch of International Investment Bankers who want to eliminate a few billion of their slaves before they run out of natural resources for their future comfort and profit?
If I was one of them, that would make sense to me. But then, I’m not such a low-life scumbag that would murder billions of human beings.
As we approach this social catastrophe more and more people are going to buy weapons and ammo rather than food and clothing, and the price’s are going to skyrocket as the honest retailers are replaced by the black- marketeer’s coming across our open borders with truck-loads of second-rate weapons and ammo. OBUMA’S ORGASISM IN ACTION!
Is anyone reading this dumb enough to assume the gangbangers and other hoodlums are going to walk into a gun store and fill out the forms to buy a weapon when most of them cannot even spell their own name? Hell no! Most of them are already in the business of selling black market and stolen guns. When some pill head makes a legal purchase with the intent of going out in a firestorm of perceived glory, do you ever wonder why he is going to murder children when there are so many deserving politicians around? Maybe it’s time to reconsider our acquiescence to our so called elected leaders, who were really appointed to continue the destruction of freedom.
Dear friends and countrymen, real American’s are not going to surrender their weapons peacefully like a bunch of scared rabbits. To us; death is much better than cowardice. If you have family members willing to participate in gun confiscation, be smart AND ENCREASE YOUR INSURRENCE POLICIES. WE ARE NOT LYING DOWN TO BE RUN OVER BY TRAITOROUS COWARDS OBEYING THEIR MASTERS ORDERS.
In parting let me say how humiliated I am to share my country with stupid people who are afraid of me because of this article. There are many out there who are convinced anyone who is mad about something are a threat to society. What a bunch of pussies America has produced!
“The duty of a Patriot is to protect his country from its government.”
“Earthly governments DO NOT have jurisdiction over God Given Rights.”
“Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon….the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, shits on the board and then struts around like it won the game..”
“Americans would die on their feet rather than live on their knees.”
Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence… From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable… The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes.”
“The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naïve and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who loves his country more than the rest of us, and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair”.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out…without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, and intolerable.”
There has never been or ever will be; a government that does not eventually tyrannize its own people, because they will sooner or later allow their government to solve the worlds problems. If the people really desire peace and prosperity they must be willing to work for it, because governments only serve their masters and themselves.
January 1st, 2016 by olddog
by Anna von Reitz
I note all the poor people rushing in and pleading, oh, no, no, no! We have to participate in the electoral process!
The electoral process of what? A private, for-profit, mostly foreign owned commercial corporation run amok?
They say, we have to get so-and-so elected and the Republicans have to take back the Senate….They don’t yet perceive the insanity of what they are saying and doing.
We’ve been playing this set up board game for a hundred years. There’s no difference between “Democrats” and “Republicans” anymore, if there ever was. Both are representatives of criminality, corruption, incompetence, and enslavement of real people to serve their corporation. They are the two cattle prods, one right, one left.
It’s important to understand that the Roosevelt’s, Teddy and FDR, set up this mental box with malice aforethought and were also
the authors of much of the semantic deceit and fraud that has engulfed America for three generations. Should it surprise anyone to
learn that they were also at the bottom of the development of the present “two party system”?
Will it sound strange to you that both modern “national” political parties got their start in Wisconsin, of all places — and that neither of these parties bear any resemblance to their historical antecedents?
For example, did you know that after the Civil War, it was the Democrats that blocked black Americans from being able to own land and vote, and it was the Republicans who championed that cause and finally pushed it through?
Perhaps you will wonder why such an odd thing exists?
Because in 1848 Wisconsin received a large number of German immigrants who were cast out of Europe for being “Freethinkers and Communists” — a result of the 1848 Workers Rebellion. These people brought their foreign ideas to Wisconsin, settled in,
and promptly began setting up the favorite implement of all Communists — a divide and conquer strategy. All things are dualistic in this world and people naturally think of things as “good” or “bad”, so it is relatively easy to use this unconscious prejudice and default in our logic systems to our detriment. Unscrupulous politicians just set up “the poles” — or as in this case, “the parties”— and they just drive the sheep from one side of the spectrum to the other.
In very short order they have us wasting our time and energy and passion taking actions which get us nowhere.
Meanwhile, they are pursuing their real agenda of fraud, more deception, and enslavement.
As if this were not obvious enough, in recent years they have instituted the use of “Diebold Voting Machines” — so they don’t even have to worry about the inconvenient evidence of real election results posed by paper ballots. They can just pay off the private companies and union workers who build and service these machines, then sit back and grin and “wait for the election results to come in”.
Are Americans really as stupid as Barack H. Obama supposes?
Please note that even without these nefarious provisions, the ‘votes” of “voters” decide nothing. They are just popularity polls, serving to tell the slavemasters what “sells” to the sheep. “Electors” are the only ones who decide “elections”.
In fact, “Voter Registration” is one of the chief means these rotters use to claim that we are “US citizens” and subject to them and their corporate rules. Any time that you see the words “registration” or “application” be aware that you are giving up something precious in exchange for something either worthless or downright damaging. When you “register” as a “voter”, you automatically identify yourself as someone claiming slave status, and you give up your birthright to function as an “elector”.
So, all of you with ears to hear, get busy and write to the local “Voter Registration Office” and tell them that you made a mistake.
You aren’t a “US citizen” nor a “U.S. Citizen” — you are an American State Citizen — and you rescind your signature on their records and forms accordingly.
If you continue to feel any unreasoning urge to vote in their private corporate elections, please be advised that Section II of the Fourteenth Amendment of their most recent public charter known as the “Constitution for the United States of America” makes it illegal for anyone who is not a “US citizen” — that is, a federal employee, civil or active duty military, Negro, foreign welfare recipient, or natural born inhabitant of a “federal state” like Puerto Rico or “enclave” like Washington, DC — to vote in THEIR elections.
You’ve most likely been breaking their law all these years and never knew it, and they have gladly let you do it because it gives them an excuse to lay claim to you and your assets and boss you around and hypothecate their debts against your credit and all sorts of other juicy advantages to them at your expense. It also gives them an excuse to arrest you any time they like and charge you for this “crime” secretly in their very own corporate tribunals. What could be more convenient?
So not only do you need to tear up those “Voter Registration Cards” and stop being fooled by all the “political process” hurrah —that is, drop out of political parties, because they, too, are strictly associated with the corporation masquerading as “your”government — you can also stop giving money to THEIR candidates and wasting time spinning your wheels.
If you want the abuse and theft and deceit to be over, you have to re-create your own PUBLIC offices on the land jurisdiction of your States.
Run for THOSE offices. Support THOSE candidates. Just like we have to rebuild the American Court system and the American monetary system, we have to rebuild the American government institutions — because, surprise, surprise — the banks took over the corporation providing you with “governmental services” a long time ago, and they haven’t been doing a good job for you.
A Republic doesn’t run itself and it can’t depend on outside “help”.
If you want to be free, now is the time.
Stop being hoodwinked by these fraud artists and driven “like dumb driven cattle”.
Just say, “No!
It is past time for the internet Patriots to wake up to the truth, learn it, and revise their commentary to fight it with all their might. This means educate the sheep non stop until they are as outraged as we all should be. We need to get this information out to a hundred million people ASAP. Why would an entire Nation accept a “for profit” Corporation for a government? There is only one way for things to change for the better, and that is for a hundred million people to read this: You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause (Paperback) by Judge Anna Maria Riezinger & James Clinton Belcher
December 24th, 2015 by olddog
By Tyler Durden
Last week, Donald Trump was delighted to learn that Russian President Vladimir Putin is apparently a fan.
Speaking to reporters after his annual press conference, Putin called trump “a talented man” before saying he’s the “absolute leader” of the US presidential race. Here’s the clip:
Now obviously, saying Trump is “an absolute leader in the presidential race” is something far different from saying he is an “absolute leader” (one is comment on the polls while the other is a character assessment), the brazen GOP frontrunner didn’t let the PR opportunity go to waste. He promptly called Putin’s apparent praise “a great honor” and told a crowd of supporters over the weekend that it’s not “such a bad thing” that the Russian leader is fond of an American politician.
Subsequently, Trump defended Putin’s record when it comes to “disappearing” journalists. “As far as the reporters are concerned, obviously I don’t want that to happen, I think it’s horrible,” Trump told ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday. “But, in all fairness to Putin, you’re saying he killed people, I haven’t seen that. I don’t know that he has. Have you been able to prove that?”
Actually, he is right, although it’s safe to say that Russia’s record is less than exemplary when it comes to press freedom…
That said, for any journalists who plan to stay alive even if Trump somehow manages to take the White House next year, the billionaire apparently doesn’t plan to kill any members of the press.
“These people, I hate some of these people,” he said, pointing to the press row at a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan before assuring the crowd that “I would never kill them.”
“I would never kill them. But some of them are such lying, disgusting people,” he continues.
At this, the crowd erupted in cheers.
And speaking of “disgusting,” Trump didn’t like Hillary Clinton’s bathroom break during the third Democratic debate. “I know where she went. It’s disgusting. I don’t want to talk about it. It’s disgusting,” he said, commenting on the former First Lady’s late return from a commercial break. “She was favored to win and she got schlonged,” he added, mocking Clinton for losing the primary to Obama in 2008. “She lost. I mean, she lost,” he added, in case anyone wasn’t familiar with what it means to be “schlonged.”
There are plenty of Americans worried about losing their Second Amendment rights to Obama. Should those same voters worry about losing their First Amendment rights under Trump?
Or does Trump merely relish trolling the liberal media at its own game? You decide.
By now, everyone should be aware that TRUMP is a certified narricisitic, egomaniac, authoritarian – with more balls than brains. Sure he is smart, and knows exactly what to say to get your support. THAT’S WHY HE HAS BEEN PUT IN THE LINE-UP. He has all the skills needed to keep the sheep feeding at the trough of poison lies and broken promises. After all these years of lies, why do you keep asking for more? Take this house of liars down and build a real constitutional government for the real people.
You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause (Paperback) by Judge Anna Maria Riezinger & James Clinton Belcher
December 22nd, 2015 by olddog
For those just now waking up—- the Federal Reserve is not and has never been any part of our government. It is a mostly-foreign private association of banks operating as a criminal cartel on our shores. The Fed was invited here by other criminals impersonating our lawful Congress of the United States more than a century ago. The details of how this happened are presented in our sworn and published affidavit of probable cause, “You Know Something Is Wrong When….An American Affidavit of Probable Cause” and The Creature from Jekyll Island.
Second, at the end of the Second World War the Allies set up the “Global Debt Facility” as a depository with the intention — at least on paper — of using this international collateral for the benefit of Mankind.
So much for good intentions and public relations. Of course, much more sinister and self-interested agendas were in play—one of which was the rape and pillaging of America and the dispossession of its people via fraud, misrepresentation, and deceit.
Attached you will find nine (9) important documents that establish at least one (1) of the several versions of the Minesfield Crossover Agreements alleged to exist and referenced by Ms. Hudes, and also a couple pages from the Secret Book of Redemption. This extraordinary work explains how the Federal Reserve self-sabotaged its fiduciary responsibilities by introducing deliberate errors in the issuance of bonds and other documents so as to provide a predetermined excuse for not paying legitimate debts when they came due.
The Federal Reserve has also been instrumental in the Federal Reserve Note Scam and the enslavement of Americans mischaracterized as British Crown subjects.
A “Federal Reserve Note” like any “note” is a Promise to Pay—-like a bond is also a promise to pay at a later date. This particular “note” was given a very special, very beneficial backing— members of Congress acting in treasonous self-interest established a fixed “dollar for dollar” exchange rate between the “Federal Reserve Note” and our actual United States Dollar.
As a result, the Federal Reserve Banks were enabled to pawn off paper I.O.U.s in exchange for our actual gold and silver—-and also for our unpaid labor and other resources.
To avoid paying these I.O.U.s they simply collapsed the old “Federal Reserve System, Inc.” and entered it into bankruptcy. All our gold and silver was stolen and transported overseas in “equitable exchange” for worthless paper, and then even the debt represented by those I.O.U.s was discharged in bankruptcy—which should have never been allowed.
That answers the question of where all the gold in Fort Knox went.
Bill Clinton had the last of our reserves shipped out during his final years in office. He also pretended to have the authority to sell off our homes, businesses, roads, bridges, and other public infrastructure to foreign investors. Literally billions of people globally plus 390 million Americans have been victimized and defrauded. Governments all over the world are looking to us to make good on all the private Federal Reserve Notes and all the bogus sales of our property that these con men pretending to represent us have sold to investors in our names. Literally.
That is who and what the Federal Reserve is—- an international crime syndicate brought here and allowed to run rampant by the British Monarch who is supposed to be our Trustee on the Highs Seas and Inland Waterways, expedited by our own employees and by other people obligated to serve us in Good Faith by every treaty, Constitution, Public Law and trust obligation there is.
The primary beneficiaries of all this criminality are in order of importance: the Pope, the Queen, Jacob Rothschild, and several corporations including SERCO.
The Pope agreed to forgive all “debts” arising from these false claims and agreed to return all American assets to the Americans they belong to. He has also taken other very important steps toward remedy.
The Queen is not eager to give up her ill-gotten gains and neither is Jacob Rothschild, who is still smirking and bobbing, confident that he and his criminal empire will escape the wrath of the world’s people and trick them yet again.
There’s only one big stumbling block. They can pay off any country on Earth except one. They can’t possibly pay back the Americans, who have been the biggest victims.
It simply can’t be done.
There isn’t enough gold or silver to pay back what they owe us already.
That’s why from their perspective, they have to do one of two things—- (1) work a final fraud scheme to gain immunity from prosecution and release from their debt to us; or, (2) kill off the Americans to reduce the amount of debt they owe and collect on the million dollar life insurance policies they’ve placed on each one of us. WW3 anyone?
But now they have just realized something rather crucial.
As long as there is one American left alive anywhere on the planet, that American can claim back absolutely everything owed to all Americans since this fraud scheme began— and tracking down and murdering every American worldwide doesn’t seem like a viable option.
They have always counted on their control of the “US Congress” as their final playing card. They haven’t counted on us pointing out that the “US Congress” isn’t our Congress.
Karen Hudes thought she had everything nicely done up in time for Christmas. She had cronies all lined up to accept our share of the gold from the Global Debt Facility. Once they accepted the gold— “in our behalf”—and accepted all the immunities and guarantees and releases hidden in the fine print, her bosses would be off the hook, free and clear, able to claim immunity and keep all our assets, too.
Luckily for the “free sovereign and independent people of the United States” the federal toadies don’t represent us in this matter and have no basis to claim that they do.
As a Trustee, Karen Hudes and the other 188 Trustees of the Global Debt Facility are in a bind. The Americans are owed their share of the gold in the Global Debt Facility. The Federal toadies have no basis to accept it for us. It isn’t in our interest to accept any fine print that gives the Queen and Rothschild and their cronies a “Home Free and Keep Our Assets” card.
And we are in no mood for Trojan Horses.
Those who have been listening to the exchanges between Karen Hudes and I have repeatedly heard her warnings about “World War III” — any such thing would be precipitated by the efforts of the criminals to assert false claims against us and our assets and their refusal to pay their own debts.
By now the entire world knows that the Americans have been the innocent victims of fiduciary trust fraud on an unimaginable scale, and millions of Americans know it, too. The Russians and Chinese know who to blame. If the Russians and Chinese want gold, they aren’t coming after us. Our pockets have been picked clean. Nobody is going to blame us for the lies of the Federal United States. It’s all too apparent who the criminals have been and it is also too apparent that the American people have suffered along with the rest of the world.
Ms. Hudes would have the world believe that I am working for some Evil Network of Global Control and am single-handedly holding up the Global Reset and preventing poor people all over the world from receiving their fair share of the Global Debt Facility gold. I say that Ms. Hudes is accusing me of what she is doing herself. She is trying to gain immunity for her bosses—some way that they can wash their hands and avoid being responsible for their insurmountable debts to us and the rest of humanity. It is their refusal to come clean that is holding up distribution of Global Debt Facility assets.
They, not we, are keeping the gold hostage, trying to use it as leverage for themselves, and trying to trick us all into accepting a bowl of porridge for our birthright.
Under their current plan the same corrupt politicians retain control and all the benefit of the gold goes to prop up national currencies which are nothing but a breeding ground for manipulation, fraud, and profit for the usual suspects.
The only benefit to the people Ms. Hudes can suggest is that they will no longer have to pay interest to the banks on the money their governments mint or print. It will mean the end of usury she says.
Pray tell, why should anyone have to pay interest to the banks in the first place?
Nobody’s currency has been backed by the banks. It has all been backed by the labor of the people and the value of their country’s land, commodity, and product assets. The interest we’ve all paid to the Federal Reserve –for example– was nothing but another gratuitous fraud scheme, a charge for a non-existent service.
So we just mindlessly donate the gold from the Global Debt Facility to the same criminals who have enslaved and defrauded us and in exchange we get what? The cessation of yet another fraudulent claim?
How does that benefit any poor people? Instead, it benefits the banks. They realize that we are looking at them and questioning their existence and examining their records and their operations and it is just a matter of time before someone says, “Why are we paying interest for a non-existent service?”
Another recurring theme in the dialogue is that I and by implication, “the Americans”, are being selfish and unreasonable, and that’s why everything is held up. The inference is that I am keeping all this gold from benefiting the poor people of the world and standing in the way of President Marco’s Prayer— but the poor people aren’t slated to get any benefit anyway. The banks are just colluding to pay the banks again and making sure that everyone has new poker chips to play in another round of “Global Economy” still completely controlled and manipulated by the same Corrupt Old Bastards Club that brought us to this end.
How about a totally different result? Something that actually helps all the people of the world and permanently solves the problem of idolatry and dishonesty being enshrined at the heart of our economic system?
To the extent that we need a planetary-wide currency system to facilitate trade, this can be accomplished by a simple numeric accounting system. No banks are required. None at all. Just a user friendly accounting system similar to an ATM that accepts deposits, transfers, and withdrawals, a multi-tier computer system similar to the internet devoted to financial transactions, and geeks to troubleshoot.
To the extent that we need to provide for the basic needs of all people this can be accomplished by the same numeric system by providing basic living stipends sufficient to pay for food, water, housing, sanitation, transportation, education, and health care deposited into each individual account. Mankind can finally be set free from want and fear of want. No more starving children. No more charity drives. No more slavery. No more anxiety. No more reason for war and conflict.
Why is this possible? Because money is a symbol standing for the value of our labor and the Earth’s natural resources that we are all heir to. Labor–which includes our creativity and inventiveness–and natural resources, are the only sources of wealth on this planet. There is already more than enough value vested in our energy and the Earth’s resources to back every possible legitimate need anyone could ever have. There has never been any reason for people to suffer and go without basic needs.
To the extent that we need to provide for new investments, this can be accomplished by giving everyone their own investment account with an additional amount credited to it each year—and let people loan their investment money without interest to any worthy lawful endeavor they support.
We know that this is a difficult concept for people who have been trained to “work for money” to grasp, but money is an arbitrary product whether it is made from gold or plastic or glass, whether it is in the form of a coin or an accounting ledger. In the past we’ve made money of different kinds and let these compete like different varieties of chocolate bars— the Dollar versus the Ruble versus the Yen— it is time to move beyond that.
People have been wrongly taught to put their faith in money and its external forms, to idolize it as a false god, when in fact, in an honest monetary system, its a hum-drum daily tool.
Those who control the production of money and who determine its accounting are all —-as the present circumstance proves and as 8000 years of history provides—- universally and inexorably corrupted by it and reduced to being dishonest profit-mongering white collar thieves.
Has the lesson been learned yet? Have we all suffered long enough? Senselessly enough? Is it time to do away with banking— and go to an Open Account System?
There is no reason for any child growing up in any place on this planet to go without food, water, shelter, and anything else that they need. Nor is there any reason for any retiree to go without a solid level of security, comfort, and enjoyment in their old age. The senseless greed of small-minded and smaller-hearted men has perpetuated the Myth of Scarcity in the midst of plenty–and it is nothing but a self-serving blasphemy against Nature and God.
There is also no reason for our money to be outside our local control. No reason for gleaming bank towers overwhelming the skylines of our cities. No reason for the Christine LaGardes of this world waving their hands and blankly discussing how they are going to seize the retirement accounts of senior citizens. No reason for Paul Ryan mindlessly grinning like a Halloween pumpkin as he discusses all the “necessary cuts” to Medicare and other services that people have already paid for umpteen times over. There is no “National Debt”. It’s all hokum, Smoke and mirrors promoted by thieves. We have only believed in “money” because we have been kept ignorant and deprived of this critical tool by force, and we now fully realize that this Ultimate Fraud has been served to us at the hands of vicious self-serving criminals who profit by it.
There must be a great cleansing of our minds and our hearts, a sucking in of new vision like a rush of air to our lungs. Any hope that the bankers and politicians have had that this would be business as usual —just a wrap up song and dance to finalize the Greatest Fraud in History— will be sadly disappointed. The Americans are awake— fully awake. The doors have been opened that no man can shut.
We are going to demand our share of the Global Debt Facility gold free and clear of any strings. We are going to liquidate the corporations that have acted as crime syndicates on our shores. We are going to lead a profound and permanent reform of the world monetary system. We will be cleaning out vacated public offices from sea to shining sea. We will be reforming and replacing the courts. We will be amending and updating The Constitution and putting an end to any outdated and prejudicial association with Great Britain allowing it to meddle in our affairs. If we get any offer of violence whatsoever from those responsible for these crimes committed against us and the other innocent people of the world, we will join with the Chinese and the Russians and everyone else who has been defrauded by these thugs and we will make sure that the promoters of these crimes never have the opportunity to harm anyone again.
Let that be a promise heard round the world and especially in Washington, DC.
Documents mentioned will be added to this article later tonight.
December 21st, 2015 by olddog
By Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
December 21, 2015
Fair Weather Friends
As a member of the National Rifle Association, I regularly receive its magazine, The American Rifleman. In the December 2015 issue appears an editorial by Wayne LaPierre, the NRA’s Executive Vice President, entitled “Obama, Hillary Embrace Gun Confiscation”. Although this observation of present political facts should hardly surprise anyone, it rightly vexes Mr. LaPierre, because of the dark history of “gun control” in Britain and especially in Australia—where confiscation went forward (according to him) “[t]o assuage an insane notion of collective guilt to impose a national gun ban”, and “will never end until the last firearm is removed from private hands”.
Now, most astute observers understand that, although the systematic disarming of Britons and Australians by their own rogue public officials over the years “will never end until the last firearm is removed from private hands”, it never has had anything, and today has nothing, to do with psychobabble about “collective guilt”, or even some “insane notion”, but instead was and is the product of a coldly calculated policy contrived by political elitists who were, and remain, intent upon creating in those benighted nations the conditions necessary for the imposition and perpetuation of police states.
These events have been, in no small measure, “models” or “test beds” for the same tactics to be employed against the United States, for the same ultimate purpose. So I wonder whether Mr. LaPierre really imagines that, as leading political elitists in this country, Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton espouse confiscation of Americans’ firearms simply because they supposedly suffer from “collective guilt”, or are the victims of “insane notion[s]”.
After all, America’s rogue public officials have generally proven themselves to be ruthless political racketeers whose every exercise of real or imaginary power demonstrates that a police state in this country appeals to them far more than what the Second Amendment calls “a free State”. Arguably, these miscreants might be found guilty of numerous crimes, or perhaps even be diagnosed as “insane” in some sense—all too many political figures in high offices in the Western World today being at least subject to suspicion as narcissistic psychopaths. Yet there is method in what might be deemed their madness with respect to “gun control”. And it is their method which must be opposed, whether they are cunning criminals who deserve condign punishment, or merely pitiable wretches who suffer from some mental disease or defect.
Which brings me to my dissatisfaction with Mr. LaPierre’s editorial. He frets that Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton “would alter the makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court with the goal of overturning the landmark decisions that have recognized the sanctity of the Second Amendment in guaranteeing our right to keep and bear arms.” (Here, he refers to the Court’s recent Heller and MacDonald decisions.) But if those decisions had ruled against the construction of the Second Amendment which Mr. LaPierre favors (as, by merely one vote among the Justices, they almost did), would he now be so enthusiastic about preserving them? Or would he, precisely in the fashion of Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton (and many others of their political coloration), be in favor of “alter[ing] the makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court with the goal of overturning th[os]e * * * decisions”? The answer to that question is obvious.
Unfortunately, Mr. LaPierre seems to embrace the fallacy known as “judicial supremacy”: the notion that the Constitution means whatever some decision of the Supreme Court says that it means. In practice, this reduces to the perverse conclusion that the Constitution must be taken to mean whatever the fifth fool who creates a majority among the Justices happens to believe at the time, no matter how obviously wrong that belief may be. So America is controlled by “a government of men”, all too fallible and corruptible, not “a government of laws” the meanings of which are capable of objective determination.
The truth is, however, that a decision of the Supreme Court does not determine whether the Constitution means this or that. Rather, the Constitution determines whether a decision of the Supreme Court in favor of this or that is correct or incorrect. We know that this must be the true rule of constitutional construction, because—by their own admissions in cases such as Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 828-830 & note 1 (1991)—the Justices have been wrong about the Constitution in the past, time and again, and therefore can and surely will be wrong in the future. Today they may hand down decisions such as Heller and MacDonald, which equivocally limit certain aspects of “gun control”; and tomorrow they may concoct some hideous decisions reversing Heller and MacDonald in favor of “gun control”. So as an institution the Court is a weak reed on which to lean if the goal is to enforce the Constitution, as opposed to some Justices’ idiosyncratic—perhaps idiotic—musings about the Constitution.
To his credit, Mr. LaPierre does realize that “judicial supremacy” poses a practical political problem: namely, who are the Justices to be? The Supreme Court is not a permanent group of wise men and women who unerringly issue opinions in perfect conformity with the Constitution as Mr. LaPierre understands (or perhaps misunderstands) it. The Court’s composition changes over time. So the only way to ensure that his interpretation of the Second Amendment prevails is continually to “pack” the Court with new Justices in sympathy with that interpretation. But to “pack” the Court requires control of the White House and the Senate, the joint efforts of which determine the Court’s composition. So Mr. LaPierre calls upon the NRA’s members to “organize as never before and stand united in voting to save the Second Amendment in November 2016”.
The problem is that America cannot rely on elected politicians to enforce the Constitution (even if the elections are actually honest). After all, since the 1930s who has enacted the various “gun-control” statutes which Mr. LaPierre hopes the Supreme Court will eventually strike down as “infringe[ments]” of “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms”, if not Members of Congress in league with various Presidents? If these people could have been, or their successors could now be, trusted to defend what Mr. LaPierre calls “the sanctity of the Second Amendment”, why would anyone be concerned with the present or the future composition of the Supreme Court? There would be no issues of “gun control” to come before the Court. And if these people cannot be trusted with the defense of the Second Amendment today or tomorrow—just as History proves that their predecessors could not be trusted in yesteryears—then how can they be trusted to appoint Justices to the Supreme Court who will defend that Amendment any more rigorously than they themselves have failed to defend it?
The undeniable political fact is that Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court are unstable and untrustworthy institutions which need to be closely supervised and controlled at all times, especially between elections. The very existence of the Constitution—replete with “checks and balances” as it is—proves as much. Moreover, the existence of the Second Amendment—or any other provision of the Constitution—by itself guarantees nothing.
The Constitution is not self-interpreting and self-executing. Its “checks and balances” must be understood, and then put into operation—religiously, rigorously, even ruthlessly. And for that purpose WE THE PEOPLE cannot rely solely upon their ostensible “representatives” in any branch of government. For those “representatives”—whether through ignorance, indolence, insouciance, self-interest, or criminal inclinations—may turn out to be the sources of the problem. To defend the Constitution, WE THE PEOPLE must depend upon themselves. They are the authors of the Constitution. As its authors, they are its final interpreters. And to ensure that their interpretations are taken seriously by public officials, they must be its ultimate enforcers. But how are WE THE PEOPLE to accomplish this task?
To answer this question requires no more than to read the Constitution. The only stable and trustworthy establishments the Constitution incorporates within its federal system are “the Militia of the several States”. They are stable and trustworthy because they are always composed of the sovereigns themselves, WE THE PEOPLE, not merely some ever-mutating gaggle of possibly incompetent or disloyal “representatives”. If THE PEOPLE themselves cannot be trusted to exercise their own sovereignty in their own interest, who can be? Certainly no one else in what the Second Amendment calls “a free State”—that is, a polity based upon popular self-government. In the final analysis, in “a free State” THE PEOPLE can depend upon no one other than themselves to maintain their freedom.
That is why the Second Amendment itself declares that “well regulated Militia” are “necessary to the security of a free State”. Not the Supreme Court—not Congress—not the President—not the NRA and all of its efforts in lobbying, litigation, electioneering, and public education—not isolated individuals trying to exercise the so-called “individual right to keep and bear arms”—not even those private groups which ignorantly style themselves “militia”. No, not any one of these alone, or any combination of a few of them, or even all of them together, but instead “well regulated Militia” defined (as Virginia’s Declaration of Rights so accurately defined them in 1776) as “composed of the body of the people, trained to arms”. Not just some of “the people”—but “the body of the people”—“trained to arms” so as to secure the Power of the Sword in the hands of the sovereigns themselves.
If in the last several decades the NRA, and Americans in general, had payed due attention to all twenty-seven words in the Second Amendment—and particularly the first thirteen, not just the last fourteen on which the NRA dotes—patriots would not have to worry about the legalistic clap-trap some majority of Justices of the Supreme Court might spew out in favor of “gun control”. For there would be no “gun control” as we know it today. If the Militia existed as the Constitution requires that they exist, Mr. LaPierre would have no occasion to rail against such “gun-control” fanatics as one Fred Hiatt, of The Washington Post, whom Mr. LaPierre quotes as calling for a “cultural shift” which will lead to “[a] gun-free society’”. Of course, Mr. Hiatt does not actually propose “[a] gun-free society” in the fullest sense of those words. No, indeed. In the society he advocates, regular armed forces and para-militarized police departments and other “law-enforcement agencies”—all of them equivalent to large or small “standing armies”—would have guns, and plenty of them.
And out of the barrels of those guns these “standing armies” would impose, under the guise of “martial law” or other “emergency powers”, the policies that Mr. Hiatt and his co-thinkers want to see directed against common Americans—Americans who, because they were thoroughly disarmed, would be unable to mount any defense against those policies, not matter how tyrannical they might be. To be sure, Mr. Hiatt himself may be simply another muddled “liberal”, incapable of coherent thinking along constitutional lines, rather than a self-conscious totalitarian. But the “gun-free society” he advocates would, of necessity, be nothing less than the opposite of what the Second Amendment calls “a free State”: namely, “a[n un]free State”. (Perhaps for him, too, as well as for the vast majority of his countrymen.)
Mr. LaPierre no doubt understands, and rightly fears, this outcome. But, in opposing it, he fails to bring to bear against it the full armamentarium the Constitution provides. The last fourteen words of the Second Amendment are not enough. The first thirteen are, as they themselves attest, “necessary”. WE THE PEOPLE must exercise “the right * * * to keep and bear Arms”, without “infringe[ment]”, through “well regulated Militia”—and not just to resist “martial law”, “emergency powers”, and other manifestations of usurpation and tyranny; but also to do everything else that “well regulated Militia” could do, and would do, and must do today that would have nothing to do with resisting usurpation and tyranny, but everything to do with providing “the security of a free State” from other, perhaps more immediate, dangers.
I have written extensively about this subject in many of my columns for NewsWithViews, and in books such as The Sword and Sovereignty, Thirteen Words, Three Rights, and By Tyranny Out of Necessity: The Bastardy of “Martial Law”. Yet tireless repetition of this message appears to be obligatory upon me in particular, as vanishingly few people seem to be paying any attention—not so much to me, but to the Constitution. As an NRA firearms instructor, I am well aware from my training that no amount of repetition of the NRA’s three basic rules of firearms safety—to wit, “always keep the gun pointed in a safe direction”, “always keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot”, and “always keep the gun unloaded until ready to use it”—can ever be excessive. How much more so for the most important teaching of the Constitution: to wit, that “[a] well regulated Militia” is “necessary to the security of a free State”? Can any number of reiterations of this precept be too many? More importantly, can its implementation be left in abeyance?
The question I put to Mr. LaPierre, to the NRA in general, and to all of the rest of the self-styled advocates of the Second Amendment is: “When do you intend to take this admonition seriously?” When it is too late?
No one can doubt that the herd of “gun-control” fanatics stampeding throughout this country today poses a clear and present danger to “a free State”. But no less—and perhaps more—dangerous are the supposed champions of the Second Amendment for whom only its last fourteen words have any significance. The “gun-control” fanatics at least understand what is at stake. Their constant attacks on so-called “assault” firearms, “high-capacity” magazines, and the most effective types of ammunition prove that they want to make revitalization of the Militia impossible, under any circumstances, by denying Americans the ability to possess the very equipment which is peculiarly apt for Militia service.
The counter-arguments from defenders of the Second Amendment that this equipment may be useful for individuals’ self-defense against common criminals, or even against real domestic “terrorists”, although true in principle is largely beside the point in practice. For this equipment is not uniquely useful for those purposes, and in many instances would not be useful at all (as most individuals are unlikely to be out and about in society on a daily basis with AR-15 rifles slung on their shoulders.)
The real constitutional argument against contemporary “gun control” lies in the first thirteen words of the Second Amendment. Namely, that every American eligible for the Militia—which includes every able-bodied adult man and woman (other than conscientious objectors)—has a right, and more importantly a duty, to possess whatever firearms can serve any purpose in the Militia, under any circumstances in which the Militia might be called forth. Constitutional “gun control” requires the possession of firearms of every description by every American eligible for the Militia. (Not that every American would necessarily possess every type of firearm; but that no American would be denied a right to possess any type of firearm.) Every self-styled advocate of the Second Amendment who denies this, or who simply evades the matter entirely, turns other Americans away from the constitutional solution to “gun control”, and thereby actually aid and abets the proponents of “gun control”. It may be that these people are motivated by good, if misguided, intentions. But the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, all of them misguided. And this country is too far down that road already to tolerate further misdirection.
© 2015 Edwin Vieira, Jr. – All Rights Reserved
Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).
For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.
He has written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals, and lectured throughout the county. His most recent work on money and banking is the two-volume Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2002), the most comprehensive study in existence of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective. www.piecesofeight.us
He is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered crash of the Federal Reserve System, and the political upheaval it causes. www.crashmaker.com
His latest book is: “How To Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary” … and Constitutional “Homeland Security,” Volume One, The Nation in Arms…
He can be reached at his new address:
52 Stonegate Court
Front Royal, VA 22630.
E-Mail: Not available
December 20th, 2015 by olddog
from “In Defense of Rural America“
By Ron Ewart, President of the
National Association of Rural Landowners
and nationally recognized author and speaker on freedom and property rights issues
Copyright Sunday, December 20, 2015 – All Rights Reserved
Conflict and unrest in America is hardly a new phenomenon. Put two human beings in a room and you have conflict and unrest due to competing interests, desires and wants. From the day the ink was dry on the Constitution and well before, conflicts, unrest and turmoil were raging. Even during the drafting of the Constitution, serious disagreement was in evidence.
In one of the first un-constitutional moves by a president, John Adams signed into law the Aliens and Sedition Act in 1798 in an attempt to suppress voters who voted in opposition to the Federalist Party. From the war of 1812, to the banking crisis under Andrew Jackson, to the Civil War, to the passing of the 16th Amendment and beyond, America has been and will continue to be in a state of crisis. That is the human condition. If it isn’t war, it is social unrest, racial tensions, labor disputes, or warring special interests looking to government to arbitrate their disputes.
For every era of unrest or crisis in the history of America, individuals have risen to meet the challenges of the times. Sometimes those individuals aided in the resolution of the crisis and sometimes they exacerbated the crisis, as Obama has done during his presidency.
Each individual that rises to the fore to become a leader of a small group, corporation, union, or even a country, comes with a wide possibility of character types, personas and experience. Political leaders tend to derive from those individuals already in political positions of power, such as previous presidents, governors, mayors, senators and congressmen and women. But on very rare occasions leaders will pop up out of nowhere from non-political pursuits.
One of the sad weaknesses of man is his desire to find and elect a leader that will lead that person personally out of a negative condition, or save him or her from a disaster. As America grew in population, the number of people within the population who possessed that weakness has grown, almost exponentially, aided and abetted by a government all too willing to provide the salvation, but at a price. The price was the person’s vote. The salvation came, unconstitutionally, out of the public treasury.
America now has more people looking for a leader (savior) to save them personally from the ravages of nature or man-made disasters (such as government tyranny, foreign threats, economic collapse, income in-equality, climate change, or the one-world-order) than ever before.
America was originally founded on the hardy, self-reliant, strong individual looking to themselves to solve their own problems because there was no government assistance available, as there shouldn’t have been. Since the time of FDR and thanks to FDR, people now look to government or government leaders to solve their personal problems. That includes individuals from both sides of the political spectrum expecting that the next president, senator, or congressman would listen to their plight and hand them a silver dollar, or go get the bad guys with a vengeance.
For many decades the American people have become more and more isolated from government and the government executive, legislative and judicial system, at every level. Government “of the people, by the people and for the people” has become abusive, tyrannical and corrupt. The “Consent of the Governed” has become virtually meaningless. The “System” is in control, not the people. (See: “The System _ Impenetrable, Inflexible and Un-Yielding”)
The people see the isolation and separation happening but don’t know how to fix it. Since the people are divided them selves and won’t come together in unity to fix the real problems, they look to their leaders to solve those problems even though those very same leaders are the leaders from which they feel isolated and whom they believe are hopelessly corrupt.
Along comes Trump. No matter what the reader thinks of Trump, positive or negative, he is colorful, brash, bold, forceful, larger than life and hugely financially successful. Yes, he repeats himself constantly, but Trump is his own man and he doesn’t care what other people think or say. He appears not to be one of those dreaded corrupt establishment politicians and he owes his soul to no one, so he says. He says things that resonate with those who feel isolated from government and want to see government returned to the true vision of the Founding Fathers, whatever their perception is of that vision. Who can blame them for seeing a “savior” in Trump?
To those individuals that resonate with his words, they don’t care that what Trump says may be impossible to implement. It just sounds good because of their anger and frustration at both parties who, from all appearances, collude with each other against American citizens.
But Trump is an enigma. He doesn’t fit the mold of the usual politician, much less the average American. The people like that. But Trump has a huge ego, nor would he be seeking the presidency if he didn’t have one. Is he a narcissist? There is no a doubt.
His ego and narcissism become manifest in a recent article written by Michael D’Antonio that appeared in the Los Angeles Times and re-printed in the Seattle Times entitled, “Understanding Donald Trump.” D’Antonio personally interviewed Trump for several hours.
Trump told D’Antonio in the interview that “I’m a big believer in natural ability. I’m convinced it is DNA, (blood line) not life’s experiences, that makes a successful man.” Trump’s second wife, Marla Maples, called Trump a king. She is reported to have said, “He’s a King. I mean truly. He is. He is a king. He really is ruler of the world, as he sees it.” (Ruler of the World? Really?)
In the article D’Antonio tells us that Trump’s mother was so enamored with royalty she spent hours watching the TV broadcast of Queen Elizabeth’s coronation. Trump’s father raised the young Donald to become “a killer” and told Donald he was a King. Donald Trump truly believes he is royalty and entitled to king status. Trump’s sense of entitlement and royalty has been with him throughout his entire life, fostered, pampered and promoted by his parents. He even tried to date Princess Di (royalty) after her divorce but was rebuffed. We believe he was in between wives at the time.
His choice of women throughout his life has been to pick a mate with exceptional qualities in status, good looks and physical prowess, mostly from European stock. When he finally picked a mate and married her, he immediately started looking for another mate and his divorces came from his reckless infidelity. This is just another window into Trump’s soul and personality.
Nevertheless, whether king in his own mind or just a very successful business man, Trump is a man of his times, rising to meet the apparent challenges of the times in which he lives. It remains to be seen whether he is just power hungry or truly believes he can make a difference in America for purely altruistic reasons.
Perhaps in these troubled times of domestic and foreign crises, maybe America needs a king-like persona to solve the problems of these times. That is of course if he can convince a majority of the electorate in the general election that they want a king to preside over America at this time. After insulting half the population of the United States in one form or another with his seemingly un-controlled outbursts, his election to the presidency is in serious question. When the votes start trickling in from the early 2016 state primaries we will soon learn whether Trump can go the distance.
The fact is, Trump is a symptom of his time, not a king, much less a God. He is a mortal man subject to all the frailties and flaws of mortal man. If anyone with normal intellect has observed Trump for any length of time, his frailties and flaws are readily apparent. The question is, do these troubled times in America require a king to solve all the domestic and foreign problems we all face and will his king-like flaws get in the way of accomplishing what he seems to want for America? Remember. He is up against an “impenetrable, inflexible and un-yielding system” that won’t break easy, even under the strong personality of a Donald Trump!
But remember ladies and gentlemen. We have already tried a king in America. FDR acted like a king and FDR did more to change the character and the people of America from self-reliance, to socialist dependency than any other president before him. Will Trump’s king-like persona return America to self-reliance and the principles of liberty, or just make Americans more dependent on government? Or, is the whole subject of a Trump presidency moot because there is no way he can win the general election? We will know soon enough.
To learn more about Donald Trump and the information we have assembled about him, his past and his run for the presidency, log onto our TRUMP website at http://www.trumperman.com.
If you are a rural landowner, don’t forget to check out our rural landowner website at http://www.narlo.org/. We are celebrating our 10th year as national advocates for the American rural landowner.
This will be our last weekly column for 2015. We will commence our column in early 2016. We wish all of our readers a very Merry Christmas and a New Year that will begin to show signs of once again returning America to truly be the land of the free and the home of the brave. Because a free America, under strong, dedicated and honorable leaders, is the only hope that Americans and the rest of the world have, if the world is ever to rise above national and international war, conflict, unrest, barbarism and turmoil.
Be well, stay safe, learn all you can about where America is today and above all, be armed with knowledge and adequate personal protection. The wise man or woman always prepares for every possible contingency, even if that contingency is war.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
NOTE: The foregoing article represents the opinion of the author and the owner of A NATION BEGUILED.COM This article may be reprinted with permission by the author only. email@example.com
There is no greater danger to America than a manic authoritarian in the office of president, and OBUMA should have made that plain to every American by now. If Trump is given that office, he, being much smarter than OBUMA will lay total control over our lives’ like OBUMA only dreamed about. He does not have to take our weapons away, or our freedom to travel, or sign every trade agreement that comes along to make us wish for an early death. All he has to do is follow the banker’s orders at this point, and our lives and dreams will be as miserable as it gets. If anyone reading this thinks there is any chance of a President reversing the present decline of freedom in America, I pity you for being so ignorant. Freedom is dead! There is not enough unity between Americans to decide which way is up. We are only an inch away from wanting a civil war because we all hate each other and that is all it took to destroy the elusion we have all held on to. America has never been what we were taught as children, and still most of us cling to it like it’s free money. Trump will create an exodus out of America that will make the immigration pandemic look like a joke. Have you folks totally forgotten who owns everything,,,,? including trump! If you have even a modicum of hope for America, you are living in a dream world!