Log in



Categories » ‘Democracy’

The Presidents Enumerated Powers Rulemaking by Executive Agencies and Executive Orders.

May 12th, 2012 by

http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/the-presidents-enumerated-powers-rulemaking-by-executive-agencies-executive-orders/

By Publius Huldah.

On election night, November 2, 2010, Rep. John Boehner said in his victory speech:

…While our new majority will serve as your voice in the people’s House, we must remember it is the president who sets the agenda for our government. … [emphasis added]

Next morning, Ezra Klein commented in the Cult of the President lives on:

I’d like Boehner to show us where in the Constitution it says that the president sets the agenda for the government.

But Boehner is not as astute as Ezra Klein, and does not know that it is our Constitution which sets the “agenda” for the federal government. The agenda the Constitution sets restricts the federal government to war, international relations & commerce; and domestically, the establishment of an uniform commercial system: a monetary system based on gold & silver, weights & measures, patents & copyrights, a bankruptcy code, and mail delivery (Art. I, Sec. 8, cls.1-16). 1

And because none of the House Republicans seem to know that our Constitution sets the agenda, and don’t know that our Constitution also enumerates the powers delegated to the President, they are allowing Obama to carry out his “agenda” to transform our Country into a fascist dictatorship.

What are the Enumerated Powers of the President?

The powers of the President are “carefully limited” and precisely defined by our Constitution. In Federalist Paper No. 71 (last para), Alexander Hamilton asks,

…what would be … feared from an elective magistrate of four years’ duration, with the confined authorities of a President of the United States?…[emphasis added] 2

The answer to Hamilton’s question is this: There would be nothing to fear if Presidents obeyed the Constitution. But they don’t obey it because the dolts in Congress don’t make them obey it!

Well, then! Here is the complete list of the President’s enumerated powers:

Art. I, Sec. 7, cls. 2 & 3, grants to the President the power to approve or veto Bills and Resolutions passed by Congress.

Art. I, Sec. 9, next to last clause, grants to the executive Branch – the Treasury Department – the power to write checks pursuant to Appropriations made by law – i.e., by Congress.

Art. II, Sec. 1, cl.1, vests “executive Power” [see below] in the President.

Art. II, Sec. 1, last clause, sets forth the President’s Oath of Office – to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”.

Art. II, Sec. 2, cl.1:

  • makes the President Commander in Chief of the armed forces when they have been called by Congress into the actual service of the United States. 3
  • authorizes the President to require the principal Officers in the executive Departments to provide written Opinions upon the Duties of their Offices.
  • grants the President power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for offenses against the United States, 4 but he can not stop impeachments of any federal judge or federal officer.

Article II, Sec. 2, cl. 2 grants to the President the power:

  • to make Treaties – with the advice and consent of the Senate. 5
  • to nominate Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls, federal judges, and various other officers – with the advice and consent of the Senate.

Article II, Sec. 2, cl. 3 grants to the President the power to make recess appointments, which expire at the end of Congress’ next session.

Art. II, Sec. 3:

  • Imposes the duty on the President to periodically advise Congress on the State of the Union, and authorizes the President to recommend to Congress such measures as he deems wise.
  • Authorizes the President, on extraordinary Occasions, to convene one or both houses of Congress [e.g., when he asks Congress to declare War]; and if both houses can not agree on when to adjourn, he is authorized to adjourn them to such time as he deems proper.
  • Imposes the duty upon the President to receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers.
  • Imposes the duty upon the President to take care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and
  • Imposes the duty upon the President to Commission all the Officers of the United States.

That’s it! Anything else the President does is unlawful and a usurpation of powers not granted.

What is the “executive Power”?

So! The granting of the “executive Power” to the President is not a blank check giving him power to do whatever he wants. The “executive Power” is merely the power to put into effect – to implement – those Acts of Congress which are within Congress’ enumerated powers. Thus, if Congress establishes “an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (as authorized by Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 4), it is the President’s duty to implement and enforce the law Congress makes. The President is to carry out – to execute – Acts of Congress.

But note well: His Oath of Office – to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”, shows that the President must use his independent judgment 6 as to which acts of Congress are and are not constitutional. Thus, as shown in this paper, “The Oath Of Office: The Check On Usurpations By Congress, The Executive Branch, & Federal Judges“, the President has the duty, imposed by his Oath, to act as a “check” on Congress (and on federal courts, as well).

Accordingly, when Congress makes a “law” which is not authorized by the Constitution, it

…would not be the supreme law of the land, but a usurpation of power not granted by the Constitution”… Federalist No. 33 (last two paras); 7

and since the President’s Oath requires him to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution“, the President must refuse to enforce an unconstitutional “law” made by Congress. Otherwise, he’d be in collusion with the legislative branch to usurp power over The People. 8

So, then! Acting as a check on Congress (and federal courts) by refusing to enforce unconstitutional “laws” (and opinions), as well as the duty of entertaining foreign dignitaries, are the only occasions where the President may act alone. His prime responsibility is to do what Congress tells him.

Article I, Sec. 1 & The Unconstitutional Administrative Law State

Now, you must learn of “administrative law” – i.e., rulemaking by Executive Agencies. 9

Article I, Sec.1, U.S. Constitution, says:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.

That little phrase is of immense importance. It means what it says, that only Congress may make laws: laws are to be made only by Representatives whom we can fire every two years, and by Senators whom we can fire every six years.

But in Joseph Postell’s “must read” paper, “Constitution in Decline“, he shows that during the administration of the nefarious Woodrow Wilson, Congress began delegating its lawmaking powers to agencies within the Executive Branch. Since then, Congress passes an overall legislative scheme, and delegates the details to be written by un-elected, un-accountable bureaucrats in the various Executive Agencies. They write the “administrative rules” which implement the Legislation. The result is the execrable Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which is accepted, by the indoctrinated members of my profession, as “law”. Go here to see the abominable CFR.

May the President Lawfully Make “Executive Orders”?

The Guiding Principle is this: The President has no authority to do ANYTHING apart from constitutional authority or statutory authority (assuming the statute itself is constitutional).

1. So! Respecting those matters within his constitutional authority & duties, and authority & duties imposed by constitutional statutes, the President may make “orders” – call them “executive orders” if you like.

For example: It is the President’s constitutional duty “to take care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. Thus, he has the duty to enforce [constitutional] laws made by Congress. How does he enforce the laws? Sometimes, by means of “orders”.

To illustrate: Say Congress makes a law, as authorized by Art. I, Sec. 8, clause 6, making it a felony to counterfeit the Securities and current Coin of the United States. If U.S. Attorneys are not prosecuting counterfeiters, the President should “order” them to do it. Or fire them.

But say Congress makes a law which purports to make possession of shotguns shorter than 18 inches a crime. Since the President’s Oath requires him to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”, he is obligated to “order” the U.S. Attorney General and the U.S. Attorneys to refuse to prosecute anyone for possession of sawed-off shotguns. Why? Because such a “law” is unconstitutional as outside the scope of the legislative powers granted to Congress in Our Constitution. It also violates the Second Amendment.

Clearly, such an order to refuse prosecution falls within the President’s constitutional duties (enforce the Constitution), and he is giving an order to people within the Executive Branch. The President is the one who is charged with carrying out the Acts of Congress – he has the “executive Power”. But because of his Oath, he may not carry out unconstitutional “laws”. That is one of the checks on Congress.

The President may also properly make orders addressing housekeeping issues within the Executive Branch: Dress codes, no smoking or drinking on the job, he may encourage executive agencies to hire qualified handicapped people, and the like. Just as if you have a business, you may make orders addressing such matters.

So! Do you see? The President may lawfully make orders to carry out his constitutionally imposed powers and duties, and powers bestowed by statutes which are constitutional; and he may address “housekeeping” issues within the Executive Branch.

2. But a President may not lawfully, by means of “orders”, exercise powers not delegated to him by the Constitution or by (constitutional) Acts of Congress.

Yet Obama has issued various executive orders which are unlawful because they are not authorized by the Constitution or by (constitutional) Acts of Congress. Here are two executive orders which are particularly pernicious because they undermine our foundational Principle of “Federalism”, and have as their object the “improper consolidation of the States into one … republic.”: 10

E.O.13575 – Establishment of the White House Rural Council: This E.O. provides for over 25 federal departments & agencies to run every aspect of rural life!

E.O. Establishing Council of Governors: The effect of this E.O. is to erase the Independence and Sovereignty of the States and consolidate us into a national system under the boot of the Executive Branch.

Joseph Stalin couldn’t do better than this. These E.O.s are blatantly unconstitutional as usurpations of powers not granted in The Constitution! So, Nullify them!

3. Likewise, executive agencies may not, by means of “administrative rulemaking”, usurp the powers of Congress. (Remember, because of Art. I, Sec.1, all rulemaking by executive agencies is unconstitutional)!

Here are several cases of such unconstitutional rulemaking:

a) When Congress refused to pass the DREAM ACT, which provided a path to citizenship for certain categories of illegal aliens, ICE had no authority to implement it, in whole or in part, by executive “memo”! Power over Rules of Naturalization (i.e., who qualifies for citizenship and what are the procedures) is expressly granted to Congress by Article I, Sec. 8, cl. 4, which grants to Congress alone the Power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization”.

The President has no constitutional power over immigration & naturalization except to enforce the Acts of Congress respecting those subjects. Article II, Sec. 3, which imposes upon the President the duty to “take care that the Laws be faithfully executed”, requires the President to enforce such constitutional Acts of Congress.

But if Congress refuses to make a law respecting naturalization, a President who enacts it anyway, via “executive order”, or “administrative regulation”, or “administrative memo” by his underlings in the various executive agencies, is acting lawlessly. His unlawful acts should be nullified, and he should be removed from office for his usurpation.

b) Congress recently did not pass three sinister and grotesquely unconstitutional bills Obama wanted: “Card check“, “Cap and Trade“, and the Disclose Act. These bills are unconstitutional as outside the scope of the legislative powers granted by our Constitution to Congress. Nowhere does our Constitution give Congress authority to make laws about labor unions (“card check”), or to regulate carbon emissions – CO2, the stuff humans and animals exhale, and plants & trees need for photosynthesis (“cap and trade”), or requiring people with federal contracts to report their personal political activities to the Executive Branch (“Disclose Act”)!

Since Congress may not lawfully make laws on such subjects, no one can. Yet, Obama is circumventing the Constitution and implementing these three failed & unconstitutional bills by agency rulemaking or executive order!:

The National Labor Relations Board, is implementing “card check” by agency regulation. Read this.

The Environmental Protection Agency is implementing “cap and trade” by agency regulation. Read this.

And it appears that Obama – in furtherance of his “agenda” to reward his supporters and punish non-supporters – is considering signing an executive order to implement the Disclose Act. Read this.

So! Let us sum this up: The President must always uphold our Constitution. When Congress makes an unconstitutional law, the President must refuse to implement it; and he may, by means of executive orders, instruct people in the Executive Branch not to comply. E.g., if a President orders the U.S. Attorneys to decline to prosecute persons for possession of sawed-off shotguns, he would be acting lawfully because Congress has no authority to ban them. But the President is violating the Constitution when he implements “card check” by agency rules made by the NLRB; when he implements “cap & trade” by agency rules made by the EPA; and the “Disclose Act” by executive order, because the President and executive agencies (as well as Congress) do not have authority over these objects; and further, no one in the Executive Branch has authority to make “laws”!

What Should we do about illegal Executive Orders & Rules made by Executive Agencies?

A Congress filled with he-men and she-women, instead of ignorant cowards, wusses, and wimps, would impeach obama for his usurpations in signing unconstitutional executive orders, and in circumventing Congress by having executive agencies implement, by means of administrative rules, legislation which Congress did not pass. In Federalist Paper No. 66 (2nd para), Hamilton expressly states that impeachment is an essential check on a President who encroaches on the powers of Congress; and in Federalist No. 77 (last para), points out that impeachment is the remedy for “abuse of the executive authority”.

But since the people in Congress are too ignorant and weak to rid us of the abomination in the White House, the States and Counties must nullify unconstitutional executive orders and administrative rules, or submit to slavery and the destruction of our Constitutional Republic. Since State and County officials have taken the Oath to support the U.S. Constitution (Art. VI, last cl.), they are bound by Oath to refuse to submit to illegal executive orders and illegal agency rules.

And of course, WE THE PEOPLE and our businesses must also spit on such illegalities by the Executive Branch. Our “creature” (Federalist No. 33, 5th para, Hamilton), has turned into Frankenstein, and has lost all legitimacy. PH

Endnotes:

1 In Federalist No. 45 (9th para), James Madison, Father of Our Constitution, says,

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. [boldface added]

2 In Federalist No. 48, Madison points out that in our representative republic,

…the executive magistracy is carefully limited; both in the extent and the duration of its power… (5th para) [i.e., limited & enumerated powers and 4 year terms]

…the executive power being restrained within a narrower compass [than that granted to the legislative branch], and being more simple in its nature… (6th para)

In Federalist No. 75 (3rd para), Hamilton says,

…The essence of the legislative authority is to enact laws, or, in other words, to prescribe rules for the regulation of the society; while the execution of the laws, and the employment of the common strength, either for this purpose or for the common defense, seem to comprise all the functions of the executive magistrate… [boldface added]

In Federalist No. 78 (6th para), Hamilton says,

The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules … The judiciary … has no influence over … the sword or the purse …and …must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm … for the efficacy of its judgments. [boldface added].

Read the list of the President’s enumerated powers! The President’s powers really are “confined” and “carefully limited” to carrying out laws made by Congress and enforcing certain judicial decisions, military defense (a power shared with Congress), appointing officials (subject to Congress’ approval), and entertaining foreign dignitaries. That’s it!

3 Only Congress has the power to declare war (Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 11)! See clauses 12-16 showing that Congress has the power to determine the funding for the military, and to make the Rules for the discipline & training of the military and the Militia.

4 Re “Offenses against the United States”: I explain here the criminal laws Our Constitution permits Congress to make. It’s a short list. Take note, you federal criminal defense lawyers.

5 I explain the treaty making power of the United States in two papers here

6 During the Terri Schiavo case, Alan Keyes spoke on the radio about the constitutional powers of the President. I seem to recall that Dr. Keyes spoke of the President’s obligation to exercise his “independent judgment” as to whether an act of Congress or a federal court opinion is constitutional. Whatever he said, he opened my eyes, and enabled me to see the elegant beauty of our Constitution.

7 Hamilton also says in Federalist No. 33 (6th para)

…it will not follow…that acts of …[the federal government] which are NOT PURSUANT to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of … [the States], will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such… [T]he clause which declares the supremacy of the laws of the Union [Art. VI, cl. 2]…EXPRESSLY confines this supremacy to laws made PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION … [caps are Hamilton’s, boldface mine]

8 Madison says in Federalist No. 44 (last para before 2.):

the success of the usurpation [by Congress] will depend on the executive and judiciary departments, which are to expound and give effect to the legislative acts; … [boldface added]

The President must not collude with the legislative or judicial branches to usurp power over The People! He must honor his Oath!

9 Most of the existing “federal” executive agencies are unconstitutional. They meddle in matters which are not the business of the federal government, as power over the matters is not granted by our Constitution to the federal government. Here are a few of the unconstitutional federal agencies: the Departments of Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Energy, Education, Transportation, and Homeland Security. Likewise for the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Communications Commission, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the National Economic Council, the Small Business Administration, the Council on Environmental Quality, etc., etc., etc.

10 Progressives have erased the concept of “federalism” from our minds. “Federalism” refers to the form of our government & the division of powers between the national government and the States. A “Federation” (which is what our Constitution creates) is an alliance of independent States associated together in a “confederation” with a national government to which is delegated authority over the States in specifically defined areas ONLY (i.e., the enumerated powers granted to Congress by our Constitution). Those enumerated powers are the only areas wherein the national government is to have authority over the States. In all other matters, the States have supremacy, are independent, and sovereign! Learn more of “federalism” here and here.

Our Framers warned against the consolidation of the sovereign States into one national sovereignty: In Federalist No. 32 (2nd para), Hamilton writes,

An entire consolidation of the States into one complete national sovereignty would imply an entire subordination of the parts; and whatever powers might remain in them, would be altogether dependent on the general will. But as the plan of the convention [the Constitution] aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, EXCLUSIVELY delegated to the United States…. [caps are Hamilton’s; boldface mine]

Federalist No. 62 (5th para) says,

… the equal vote allowed to each State is at once a constitutional recognition of the portion of sovereignty remaining in the individual States, and an instrument for preserving that residuary sovereignty. So far the equality ought to be no less acceptable to the large than to the small States; since they are not less solicitous to guard, by every possible expedient, against an improper consolidation of the States into one simple republic. [boldface mine]

And in Federalist No. 39 (6th para), Madison says,

“But it was not sufficient,” say the adversaries of the proposed Constitution, “for the convention to adhere to the republican form. They ought, with equal care, to have preserved the FEDERAL form, which regards the Union as a CONFEDERACY of sovereign states; instead of which, they have framed a NATIONAL government, which regards the Union as a CONSOLIDATION of the States.” And it is asked by what authority this bold and radical innovation was undertaken? The handle which has been made of this objection requires that it should be examined with some precision….[caps are Madison’s]

Madison then gives a brilliant exposition of the “national” and “federal” aspects of Our Constitution. More than any other Paper, No. 39 addresses the primary political problem of our Time: The destruction of “federalism” by eradicating all vestiges of sovereign & independent States.

We are a trusting People easily lead astray. Make something sound “patriotic”, and we are all for it. Since 1892, American public school children have been indoctrinated with the statist Lie that ours is an indivisible national government. This was done by means of the Pledge of Allegiance: “….one nation … indivisible…”. Is it any wonder that the author of this nasty bit of poison, Francis Bellamy, was a socialist who worked with the National Education Association to institute this statist indoctrination into the public schools? This pernicious pledge is why you don’t know, and no one knows, that our Constitution created a “federation” of sovereign & independent States, united only for the limited purposes enumerated in the Constitution. Wikipedia has good info on Bellamy. PH

TRAITOR

THE 911 MYTH State Propaganda Historical Revisionism and the Perpetuation of the 911 Myth

May 10th, 2012 by

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30721

 

By Prof. James F. Tracy

In the immediate wake of President Obama’s May 1, 2011 announcement of the alleged extrajudicial killing of Osama bin Laden by US military forces, a struggle reemerged over the official 9/11 myth that major journalistic outlets have been complicit in perpetuating over the past decade. The corporate media’s reaction to the robust skepticism over bin Laden’s assumed execution suggested a great deal about the extent to which they are locked in to upholding the broader 9/11 parable and serving the Anglo-American political-economic establishment and status quo.

After Obama’s statement on bin Laden’s fate citizen journalists and activists employing blogs and social media posed questions that should have been asked by professional journalists—specifically pointing to the need for further evidence supporting the president’s claims and the Obama administration’s curiously inconsistent description of events. Many cited reports and commentary by mainstream news outlets, such as CBS, CNN, and The New York Times, quoting government sources that bin Laden was in failing health and likely died in December 2001. Nevertheless, once a lie has been put in to motion and accepted as truth by the intellectual class it often becomes a de facto reality the broader society is obliged to endure, for better or worse.

In 2005 author and media critic Normon Solomon contacted the Washington Post to inquire whether its reporting of the 1964 Tonkin Gulf incident alleging the North Vietnamese attacked US ships was ever retracted. Though later proven false, the reports were carried as front page news in US papers and figured centrally in the Congressional passage of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution formally initiating the Vietnam War. Solomon eventually caught up with one especially pertinent Post staffer. "’I can assure you that there was never any retraction,’ said Murrey Marder, a reporter who wrote much of the Washington Post's coverage of August 1964 events in the Gulf of Tonkin. He added: ‘If you were making a retraction, you'd have to make a retraction of virtually everyone's entire coverage of the Vietnam War.’"

A similar dynamic is at play in defending the 9/11 myth. Yet today public skepticism more forcefully presents itself as an unmanageable chorus of disbelief through the internet. Nevertheless, following the lead of official spokespersons when such sources should be vigorously scrutinized, the so-called free press continues its willful immersion in a false historical reality. In so doing it condemns much of society to a constant forgetting and continued existence in a government-devised milieu impervious to conventional reason and logic.

Journalistic outlets exercising true independence and not beholden to maintaining the official 9/11 story would have likewise exhibited skepticism at Barack Obama’s claims, especially in light of the administration’s clearly contrived attempts at selling the event, such as photos of cabinet members allegedly watching it via satellite. Instead, journalists became part of the dutiful cheering section, attacking detractors’ assertions as “conspiracy theories”.

In keeping with a tradition of largely superficial reportage of 9/11 and its aftermath, many stories derided what professional journalists themselves should have been forcefully demanding: more proof of the operation’s authenticity and outcome. In fact, this skepticism is exactly what a variety of bloggers and like alternative news outlets offered.

When such assertions can’t be easily suppressed they must be ridiculed. A LexisNexis search yields over 100 stories and opinion pieces appearing in major newspapers and wire services for the week of May 2, 2011 dismissing criticisms and calls for further evidence as “conspiracy theories”. In light of the following one must ponder whether the national media’s output would differ significantly if the US government exercised direct control over them.

“The White House was facing mounting pressure Monday night to release concrete evidence that Osama bin Laden had been assassinated, after conspiracy theories began to circulate suggesting he may have survived the attack.” –Canwest News Service, May 2, 2011.

“[W]hile the watery grave may help diminish bin Laden’s status as a martyr to his followers, it was already fueling conspiracy theories; as the administration resisted releasing even photographs of the slain terrorist leader on Monday, a predictable haze of myth and rumor has already, inevitably, begun to rise around him.” –Politico.com, May 2, 2011.

“While much of America celebrated the dramatic killing of Osama bin Laden, the Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists still had questions. For them and a growing number of skeptics, the plot only thickened.”—Washington Post, May 2, 2011.

“Osama bin Laden had scarcely drawn his last breath when the conspiracy theories sprouted: Where’s the body? Where are the photos of the corpse? Why didn’t they take him alive? The theorists demanded.”—Atlanta Journal Constitution, May 3, 2011.

“Less than 48 hours after the White House announced the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan and his burial at sea, ‘conspiracy theories’ are racing across the planet.”—Christian Science Monitor, May 3, 2011.

“As blogs hummed with allegations that the Obama administration had faked the middle-of-the-night raid, the Bin Laden ‘death hoax’ threatened to replace questions about President Obama’s citizenship as the latest Internet rumor to go viral.”—Los Angeles Times, May 3, 2011.

“The news that Osama bin Laden was killed by an American military raid ordered by President Obama is too far from the narrative of those who desperately cling to the twisted notion that our president is a passive, hate-America-first, subversive Al-Qaeda sympathizer, if not operative.”—Palm Beach Post, May 3, 2011.

“The White House says Osama bin Laden is dead and buried deep under the Arabian Sea. But conspiracy theorists in Pakistan, the United States and other countries insist that like Elvis, he’s still in the room.”—Toronto Star, May 4, 2011.

“Like clockwork, the death of Osama bin Laden has ushered in another round of conspiracy theories. The al-Qaida leader’s body may be beyond the reach of his followers’ veneration as it rests on the sea floor, but the lack of a corpse in custody has offered proof of a conspiracy to those inclined to doubt the official narrative.”—Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, May 4, 2011.

“The decision not to release photographs of Osama bin Laden’s corpse and the way the White House has changed its account of how he died has prompted conspiracy theories about his death. Perhaps unsurprisingly, these theories have proliferated across the web.”—UK Guardian, May 6, 2011.

When the world’s most powerful journalistic institutions resort to name calling there is something seriously amiss in the broader intellectual climate. Much like 1964, it involves a conscious betrayal of the historical record and the attendant consequences of such.

The conspiracy theory/theorist soubriquet is reflexively feared by professional journalists and academics alike who believe (with some justification) their reputations will be undermined by such thought crimes against the state. Thus, like an instrument that would easily be at home in the most extreme totalitarian regimes, intellectual workers self-discipline themselves as the “conspiracy theory” mechanism determines the trajectory and parameters of public discourse, dissent, and recollection.

Intellectual cowardice is reinforced by a set of circumstances whereby even if alternative accounts questioning the official line are exhaustively researched and documented with credible information and sources, mobilization of the “conspiracy theory” label by state censors and their journalistic accomplices will render the counter-arguments suspect. And, in an on-the-go culture where citizens are heavily reliant for information on headlines and sound-bites versus deliberate analysis, such lines of reasoning are destined for the memory hole.

James F. Tracy is Associate Professor of Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University

 

TREASON

 

 

 

KISSINGER: OBAMA PRIMED TO CREATE “NEW WORLD ORDER”

May 6th, 2012 by

http://www.wnd.com/2009/01/85442/

 

Conflicts across the globe and an international respect for Barack Obama have created the perfect setting for establishment of “a New World Order,” according to Henry Kissinger, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former secretary of state under President Nixon.

Kissinger has long been an integral figure in U.S. foreign policy, holding positions in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations. Author of over a dozen books on foreign policy, Kissinger was also named by President Bush as the chairman of the Sept. 11 investigatory commission.

Kissinger made the remark in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” hosts Mark Haines and Erin Burnett at the New York Stock Exchange, after Burnett asked him what international conflict would define the Obama administration’s foreign policy.

Read
“Hope of the Wicked,” where author Ted Flynn reveals the greatest
deception in modern history – corporations, foundations and governments
converging to bring about a New World Order.

“The president-elect is coming into office at a moment when there is upheaval in many parts of the world simultaneously,” Kissinger responded. “You have India, Pakistan; you have the jihadist movement. So he can’t really say there is one problem, that it’s the most important one. But he can give new impetus to American foreign policy partly because the reception of him is so extraordinary around the world. His task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created. It’s a great opportunity, it isn’t just a crisis.”

The phrase ‘new world order’ traces back at least as far as 1940, when author H.G. Wells used it as the title of a book about a socialist, unified, one-world government. The phrase has also been linked to American presidents, including Woodrow Wilson, whose work on establishing the League of Nations pioneered the concept of international government bodies, and to the first President Bush, who used it in a 1989 speech.

“A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment,” said Bush before a joint session of Congress. “Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective – a new world order – can emerge: A new era … in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony.”

The phrase “New World Order” causes alarm for many Americans, particularly those concerned about an international governing body trumping U.S. sovereignty or those that interpret biblical prophecy to foretell the establishment of a one-world government as key to the rise of the Antichrist. Conspiracy theorists, too, have latched on to the phrase, concerned that powerful financial or government figures are secretly plotting to rule the world.

Kissinger’s ties to government and international powers – as well as his use of the phrase – have made him suspect in the eyes of many who are wary of what “new world order” might actually mean.

“There is a need for a new world order,” Kissinger told PBS interviewer Charlie Rose last year, “I think that at the end of this administration, with all its turmoil, and at the beginning of the next, we might actually witness the creation of a new order – because people looking in the abyss, even in the Islamic world, have to conclude that at some point, ordered expectations must return under a different system.”

As WND reported, Kissinger was also part of last year’s super-secret Bilderberg Group, an organization of powerful international elites, including government, business, academic and journalistic representatives, that has convened annually since 1954.

According to sources that have penetrated the high-security meetings, the Bilderberg meetings emphasize a globalist agenda and promote the idea that the notion of national sovereignty is antiquated and regressive.

CNBC’s Haines concluded the Kissinger interview by asking, “Are you confident about the people President-elect Obama has chosen to surround him?”

Kissinger replied, “He has appointed an extraordinarily able group of people in both the international and financial fields.”


Posted by: Erin

Some unprecedented news today, folks. Never in the history of the United Nations has a U.S. President taken the chairmanship of the powerful UN Security Council. Perhaps it is because of what could arguably be a Constitutional prohibition against doing so. To wit: Section 9 of the Constitution says:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

The UN has a standing military force, we are held to it’s global policies, and we have an Ambassador to the UN just as we do to other foreign States. Clearly the argument can be made that the UN can be considered a foreign State. Our heads of State don’t serve at the UN, Ambassadors do.

Nonetheless, the rotating chairmanship of the UN Security Council goes to the U.S. this month. The normal course of business would have U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice take the gavel. However, this time will be different. Constitution be damned, Barack Hussein Obama has decided to put HIMSELF in the drivers seat, and will preside over global nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament talks slated to begin September 24th. The Financial Times says:

Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council.

The topic for the summit-level session of the council on September 24 is nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament – one of several global challenges that the US now wants to see addressed at a multinational level.

UN officials also hope a climate change debate on September 22 will give fresh impetus to the search for a global climate deal at Copenhagen in December. There are also hopes a possible meeting between Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli prime minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Authority president, that Mr. Obama would host, could lead to a breakthrough about a timetable for Middle East peace.

Here is what the UN Security Council does. Picture Obama as the Chair of this committee with this power.

Under the UN Charter, the functions and powers of the Security Council are:

* to maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations;
* to investigate any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction;
* to recommend methods of adjusting such disputes or the terms ofsettlement;
* to formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate armaments;
* to determine the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression and to recommend what action should be taken;
* to call on Members to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving the use of force to prevent or stop aggression;
* to take military action against an aggressor;
* to recommend the admission of new Members;
* to exercise the trusteeship functions of the United Nations in “strategic areas”;
* to recommend to the General Assembly the appointment of the Secretary-General and, together with the Assembly, to elect the Judges of the International Court of Justice.

No American president has ever attempted to acquire the image of King of the Universe by officiating at a meeting of the UN’s highest body. Obama apparently believes that being flanked by council-member heads of state like Col. Moammar Qaddafi — who is expected to be seated five seats to Obama’s right — will cast a sufficiently blinding spell on Americans.

He undoubtedly hopes that the horrid state of the nation’s economy, turmoil over health care, and a summer of racial scapegoating will pale by comparison. This role as UN Security Council chair will allow him to make decisions, influence legislation and resolutions, and set the agenda.

Right Soup will be closely following this very unsettling turn of events. Like I always say, pay attention to what Obama DOES, not just what he says.

Share this Right Soup with others:

 

Related Posts on Right Soup:

Most Recent Posts on Right Soup:

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Lord, we pray that you will infect the body and brains of the International Banking Cartel with worms to eat them from the inside out, and all of those who have supported them these many years, and especially this usurper scumbag in the oval office. Send their souls to everlasting torment.

Restore America to a lawful government, and the minds of the citizens to full cognition of the benefits of being independent, self controlled and responsible for their own conduct. Men who need no guidance from anyone but you.

In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen

James P. Harvey

olddog@anationbeguiled.com

 

 

Obama Signs Executive Order Declaring International Law for the United States

May 5th, 2012 by

 

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/obama-signs-executive-order-declaring-international-law-for-the-united-states/14439

 by Henry Shivley

On May 1, 2012, our Glorious Leader, Premier Barack Obama AKA Barry Soetoro AKA Barry the Rat, signed yet another Executive Order – Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation.  This dictate is designed to standardize regulations between the United States and it’s so called trading partners.

What is a regulation?  A law.  So what is actually being attempted here is a standardization of international law.  It is an absolute violation of the Constitution for the United States to legislate our law outside of our borders.

Considering the many international security agreements the traitors occupying our highest seats of power have entered into, this latest executive order can absolutely be used to institute gun confiscation laws/regulations, without any consent by our Congress or our Judicial.  And once these foreign laws are brought to the United States under the various security agreements, foreign troops will be brought in to enforce the foreign laws upon the people of the United States.

So look at what we have now.

  • The Patriot Act which allows unlimited spying on the American people by the government.
  • The National Defense Authorization Act with Sections 1021 and 1022 for the military arrests and indefinite detention of American nationals without any due process of the law.
  • HR 347 Trespass Law for the implementation of Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act upon any citizen who dares to speak out against the insurgency.
  • Executive Order National Defense Resources Preparedness Act, which allows the dictator to confiscate every resource of the United States, including we the people as conscripts to be put in servitude to the insurgency.

This is exactly what the Bolsheviks did to the Russian people in 1917.  Now we have this new executive order for the implementation of laws not legislated by our Congress.  If we were to allow ourselves to be disarmed by these international soviet socialists, the next step would be to eliminate everyone who refuses to acquiesce to collective slavery.

This latest executive order is nothing more than another act of blatant treason and we the American people must reject it absolutely.

Here is the Executive Order.  Read and interpret it for yourself.

EXECUTIVE ORDER
– – – – – – –
PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY COOPERATION

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to promote international regulatory cooperation, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1Policy. Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), states that our regulatory system must protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation. In an increasingly global economy, international regulatory cooperation, consistent with domestic law and prerogatives and U.S. trade policy, can be an important means of promoting the goals of Executive Order 13563.

The regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may differ from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address similar issues. In some cases, the differences between the regulatory approaches of U.S. agencies and those of their foreign counterparts might not be necessary and might impair the ability of American businesses to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.

Sec2Coordination of International Regulatory Cooperation. (a) The Regulatory Working Group (Working Group) established by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), which was reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563, shall, as appropriate:
(i) serve as a forum to discuss, coordinate, and develop a common understanding among agencies of U.S. Government positions and priorities with respect to:
(A) international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulatory actions;
(B) efforts across the Federal Government to support significant, cross-cutting international regulatory cooperation activities, such as the work of regulatory cooperation councils; and

(C) the promotion of good regulatory practices internationally, as well as the promotion of U.S. regulatory approaches, as appropriate; and

(ii) examine, among other things:

(A) appropriate strategies for engaging in the development of regulatory approaches through international regulatory cooperation, particularly in emerging technology areas, when consistent with section 1 of this order;

(B) best practices for international regulatory cooperation with respect to regulatory development, and, where appropriate, information exchange and other regulatory tools; and

(C) factors that agencies should take into account when determining whether and how to consider other regulatory approaches under section 3(d) of this order.

(b) As Chair of the Working Group, the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) shall convene the Working Group as necessary to discuss international regulatory cooperation issues as described above, and the Working Group shall include a representative from the Office of the United States Trade Representative and, as appropriate, representatives from other agencies and offices.

(c) The activities of the Working Group, consistent with law, shall not duplicate the efforts of existing interagency bodies and coordination mechanisms. The Working Group shall consult with existing interagency bodies when appropriate.

(d) To inform its discussions, and pursuant to section 4 of Executive Order 12866, the Working Group may commission analytical reports and studies by OIRA, the Administrative Conference of the United States, or any other relevant agency, and the Administrator of OIRA may solicit input, from time to time, from representatives of business, nongovernmental organizations, and the public.

(e) The Working Group shall develop and issue guidelines on the applicability and implementation of sections 2 through 4 of this order.

(f) For purposes of this order, the Working Group shall operate by consensus.

Sec3Responsibilities of Federal Agencies. To the extent permitted by law, and consistent with the principles and requirements of Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866, each agency shall:

(a) if required to submit a Regulatory Plan pursuant to Executive Order 12866, include in that plan a summary of its international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulations, with an explanation of how these activities advance the purposes of Executive Order 13563 and this order;

(b) ensure that significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts are designated as such in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, on RegInfo.gov, and on Regulations.gov;

(c) in selecting which regulations to include in its retrospective review plan, as required by Executive Order 13563, consider:

(i) reforms to existing significant regulations that address unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements between the United States and its major trading partners, consistent with section 1 of this order, when stakeholders provide adequate information to the agency establishing that the differences are unnecessary; and

(ii) such reforms in other circumstances as the agency deems appropriate; and

(d) for significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts, consider, to the extent feasible, appropriate, and consistent with law, any regulatory approaches by a foreign government that the United States has agreed to consider under a regulatory cooperation council work plan.

Sec. 4Definitions. For purposes of this order:

(a) “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).

(b) “International impact” is a direct effect that a proposed or final regulation is expected to have on international trade and investment, or that otherwise may be of significant interest to the trading partners of the United States.

(c) “International regulatory cooperation” refers to a bilateral, regional, or multilateral process, other than processes that are covered by section 6(a)(ii), (iii), and (v) of this order, in which national governments engage in various forms of collaboration and communication with respect to regulations, in particular a process that is reasonably anticipated to lead to the development of significant regulations.

(d) “Regulation” shall have the same meaning as “regulation” or “rule” in section 3(d) of Executive Order 12866.

(e) “Significant regulation” is a proposed or final regulation that constitutes a significant regulatory action.

(f) “Significant regulatory action” shall have the same meaning as in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.

Sec5Independent Agencies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order.

Sec6General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof;

(ii) the coordination and development of international trade policy and negotiations pursuant to section 411 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2451) and section 141 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2171);

(iii) international trade activities undertaken pursuant to section 3 of the Act of February 14, 1903 (15 U.S.C. 1512), subtitle C of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988, as amended (15 U.S.C. 4721 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2171 note);

(iv) the authorization process for the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements pursuant to 1 U.S.C. 112b(c) and its implementing regulations (22 C.F.R. 181.4) and implementing procedures (11 FAM 720);

(v) activities in connection with subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31 of the United States Code, title 26 of the United States Code, or Public Law 111-203 and other laws relating to financial regulation; or

(vi) the functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

TREASON

 

Challenge the Political Establishments Now or Kiss the Constitution Good-Bye

April 26th, 2012 by

 

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/challenge-the-political-establishments-now-or-kiss-the-constitution-good-bye?f=must_reads#ixzz1t4q8XsOf

 

by LAWRENCE SELLIN, PHD April 25, 2012

 

The United States is no longer what John Adams described as a government of laws and not of men. It has become the opposite.

Many of those presently in the federal government have violated their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution, they have obstructed justice and they have scorned and rejected citizens' attempts to petition for the redress of grievances.

The continuous stonewalling by both parties' elite is clearly directed toward preventing an investigation that would reveal a federal government riddled with corruption and that operates solely for the benefit of politicians and their wealthy power-brokers.

The conspiracy of silence by the political establishments and the associated news blackout by a compliant media can only be explained by complicity in a cover-up of criminal acts that, if they became known, would enrage the American people and rock the political system to its core.

If there is another explanation, I would like to know it.

The plain fact is that if the candidates were fully vetted and the activities of the Democrat and Republican establishments were fully known, the American people would rise up in open rebellion. 

Between now and Election Day, there is a window of opportunity to fight the permanent political corruption in Washington, D.C., restore the Constitution and uphold the rule of law. After that, it is "Game Over."

As Abraham Lincoln noted, the American people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.  The loyalty of the American people is to our country and our Constitution, not to shady officeholders or petty bureaucrats.

For too long we have been silent and inattentive. We must now overthrow those responsible for the endemic corruption in our federal government.

The American people are frustrated because they have believed that politicians can be informed or influenced in the spirit of representative government. That is impossible because the political establishments represent only themselves, only care about winning elections and the power and wealth it brings to them, not about the principles upon which our country was founded.

Petitioning the current Congress for the redress of grievances is futile. Members of Congress have turned a deaf ear to the voices of their constituents.  They can no longer be trusted as the guardians of our posterity.  In regard to members of Congress, the words of Thomas Paine come to mind:

"The world will be puzzled to decide whether you are an apostate or an impostor; whether you have abandoned good principles, or whether you ever had any."

The political establishments have now decided that they alone will determine which parts of the Constitution they will choose to follow and which ones they prefer to ignore. Their propaganda ministry, the mainstream media, will provide the necessary thought control.

The whims of politicians have replaced the Constitution as the basis for the rule of law in the United States. It is a recipe for chaos.

Thomas Jefferson wrote:

"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?"

The first "shots" of the Second American Revolution have not been fired, but the battle lines have been drawn.

The days of education and persuasion of corrupt politicians are over.

The time for resistance has come.

This offer expires November 6, 2012.

TYRANNY

 

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of "Afghanistan and the Culture of Military Leadership" and "Political Establishments and the Culture of Dependency". He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Ok, let’s start from the beginning again, since so many are still enamored with the Original Constitution.

 

The United States exists in two forms: The original United States that was in operation until 1860; a collection of sovereign Republics in the union. Under the original Constitution the States controlled the Federal Government; the Federal Government did not control the States and had very little authority.

The original United States has been usurped by a separate and different UNITED STATES formed in 1871, which only controls the District of Columbia and it’s territories, and which is actually a corporation (the UNITED STATES CORPORATION) that acts as our current government. The United States Corporation operates under Corporate/Commercial/Public Law rather than Common/Private Law.

The original Constitution was never removed; it has simply been dormant since 1871. It is still intact to this day. This fact was made clear by Supreme Court Justice Marshall Harlan (Downes v. Bidwell, 182, U.S. 244 1901) by giving the following dissenting opinion: “Two national governments exist; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and Independently of that Instrument.”

The rewritten Constitution of the UNITED STATES CORPORATION bypasses the original Constitution for the United States of America, which explains why our Congressmen and Senators don’t abide by it, and the President can write Executive Orders to do whatever he/she wants. They are following corporate laws that completely strip sovereigns of their God given unalienable rights. Corporate/Commercial/Public Law is not sovereign (private), as it is an agreement between two or more parties under contract. Common Law (which sovereigns operate under) is not Commercial Law; it is personal and private.

To understand this document, you need to understand some basic terms. for a complete understanding.

The basic terms are:

De Jure – Existing by right or according to law; original, lawful. Common Law operates under De Jure terms.

De Facto – In practice but not necessarily ordained by law; in fact, in reality. Corporate Law operates under De Facto terms.

Sovereign – A real person. Sovereigns can own property while Citizens/Subjects cannot. According to the original Constitution, all government comes from the Sovereign Individual. Without the Sovereign Individual, there is no government.

U.S. Citizen/Subject – A corporate fictitious entity that merely represents the real person. It acts as a “strawman.” [To call oneself a “sovereign citizen” or “sovereign subject” is an oxymoron, since “sovereign” and “citizen/subject” are mutually exclusive of each other.] When asked if you are a “U.S. Citizen” on corporate legal documents, if you check “yes,” you agree to the terms of Corporate Law and unknowingly relinquish your sovereign status and transfer all of your rights to the UNITED STATES CORPORATION since you are now under contract.

Corporation – A non-human, fictitious entity. Corporate fictitious entities are denoted in all caps. This includes the names of Citizens/Subjects. Your fictitious “strawman” entity is addressed in all caps, i.e. JOHN SMITH, rather than John Smith.

Common Law – God’s law. Common Law and the system of De Jure Juries apply to sovereigns in disputes. In Common Law, contracts must be entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally.

Admiralty/Maritime Law/International Law – The King’s law. Deals with criminal acts that only apply to international contracts. Under this law, the people are no longer sovereign. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) that the United States practices is based on Admiralty Law. Under the UCC, contracts do not have to be entered into knowingly. Simple agreements can be binding, and as long as you exercise the benefits of that “agreement,” you must meet the obligations associated with those benefits. If you accept the benefit offered by the government, then you MUST follow, to the letter, each and every statute involved with that benefit. That “benefit” is the Federal Reserve Notes (U.S. dollars). By paying for things with U.S. dollars you are unknowingly giving up all of your Constitutional rights and are legally obligated to follow all of the UCC statues. But you were NEVER told this. NOTE: this is why we cannot close down the Federal Reserve!

Lawful – A term used in Common Law.

Legal – A term used in the UCC which applies to Corporate Law.

HOW THE CONSTITUTION WAS USURPED BY THE CORPORATION

(note by Panama Legal: These are the basic premises adhered to by the people in the movement and the people in the Sovereign movement. The Government is a Corporation actually functioning as the Federal Government. Thus it does not have to follow the constitution. Also it does not matter if Obama is not a natural born citizen since it is a corporation he is the head of. The corporation gets the permission of the people to reign over them by deceit. This is done by wording in the Birth Certificates, Social Security Cards, driving Licenses, IRS forms, Marriage Licenses and other documents. They always refer to the “person” in all capital letters. This means the name represents a corporate entity. This is how the corporation courts get jurisdiction over you. Their courts do not fly the “reaL” American flag. They use the military or admiralty flag. For a discourse on this try this website: http://www.usavsus.info/

What the theory is goes like this. When you enter a US Courtroom there is a military or admiralty flag flying. The US Military does not have the protection of the constitution, neither does this apply to admiralty laws with ships at sea. When you enter a court room and cross through that little wooden gate they have and go to the area where the plaintiff (prosecutor) and defendant sit along with judge, court reporter, you are entering a “ship” or a foreign country as evidenced by the admiralty or military flag flying thus the constitution has no applicability and you are under equity law not common law. The flaw with their scheme is that there is no full disclosure to the people about any of this. This is brief over simplified synopsis of the scam run by the federal corporation.

Here is a Timeline of events that lead to the current United States.

In 1788 (January 1), The United States was officially bankrupt.

In 1790 (August 4), Article One of the U.S. Statues at Large, pages 138-178, abolished the States of the Republic and created Federal Districts. In the same year, the former States of the Republic reorganized as Corporations and their legislatures wrote new State Constitutions, absent defined boundaries, which they presented to the people of each state for a vote…the new State Constitutions fraudulently made the people “Citizens” of the new Corporate States. A Citizen is also defined as a “corporate fiction.”

In 1845, Congress passed legislation that would ultimately allow Common Law to be usurped by Admiralty Law. www.barefootsworld.net/admiralty.html explains this change. The yellow fringe placed at the bottom of court flags shows this is still true. Before 1845, Americans were considered sovereign individuals who governed themselves under Common Law.

In 1860 – Congress was adjourned Sine Die – Lincoln could not legally reconvene Congress.

In 1861, President Lincoln declared a National Emergency and Martial Law, which gave the President unprecedented powers and removed it from the other branches. This has NEVER been reversed.

In 1863, the Lieber Code was established taking away your property and your rights.

From 1864-1867, Several Reconstruction Acts were passed forcing the states to ratify the 14th Amendment, which made everyone slaves.

In 1865, the capital was moved to Washington, D.C., a separate country – not a part of the United States of America.

In 1871, The United States became a Corporation with a new constitution and a new corporate government, and the original constitutional government was vacated to become dormant, but it was never terminated. The new constitution had to be ratified by the people according to the original constitution, but it never was. The whole process occurred behind closed doors. The people are the source of financing for this new government.

In 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) was passed. This insightful video from [link to movielocker.com/4084)] states the following: “This act was implemented to deal with the countries we were at war with during World War I. It gave the President and the Alien Property Custodian the right to seize the assets of the people included in this act and if they wanted to do business in this country they could apply for a license to do so. By 1921, the Federal Reserve Bank (the trustee for the Alien Property Custodian) held over $700,000,000 in trust.” Understand that this trust was based on our assets, not theirs.

In 1933, 48 Stat 1, of the TWEA was amended to include the United States Person because they wanted to take our gold away. Executive Order 6102 was created to make it illegal for a U.S. Citizen to own gold. In order for the Government to take our gold away and violate our Constitutional rights, we were reclassified as ENEMY COMBATANTS.”

In 1933, there was a second United States bankruptcy. In the first bankruptcy the United States collateralized all public lands. In the 1933 bankruptcy, the U.S. government collateralized the private lands of the people (a lien) – they borrowed money against our private lands. They were then mortgaged. That is why we pay property taxes.

 

From a speech in Congress in The Bankruptcy of the United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol. 33, page H-1303, Speaker Representative James Trafficant Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House states:

“…It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: “The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States…

Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens of mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) “Hypothecated” all property within the Federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. Citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a “beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the Federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets, and labor of their “subjects,” the 14th Amendment U.S. Citizen to the Federal Reserve System. In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States Corporation all of the credit “money substitute” it needed.

Like any debtor, the Federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the Federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their “economic slaves,” the U.S. Citizens, as collateral against the federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks, forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the People have exchanged one master for another.”

In 1944, Washington D.C. was deeded to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) by the Breton Woods Agreement. The IMF is made up of wealthy people that own most of the banking industries of the world. It is an organized group of bankers that have taken control of most governments of the world so the bankers run the world. Congress, the IRS, and the President work for the IMF. The IRS is not a U.S. government agency. It is an agency of the IMF. (Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al. CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.D.I., Public Law 94-564, Senate Report 94-1148 pg. 5967, Reorganization Plan No. 26, Public Law 102-391.)

HOW CAN WE REPAIR OUR COUNTRY RIGHT NOW?

“The Supreme Court has said the De Jure Government offices still exist but the people have failed to occupy them.

Remember Downs v. Bidwell and the dissenting opinion of Justice Marshall Harlan? He said that two national governments exist; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions. This is one that We the people need to force our elected public officials to occupy – De Jure rule.

We need to change that by organizing Grand Juries and putting our officials back under De jure rule and out of the Corporate (or Military) Rule that they are currently operating under.

Our elected officials will then have to operate under the limits of their Oath of office to uphold the U.S. and State Constitutions, circa 1860. When they violate the Oath it’s a capital crime.

The reason we go back to 1860 is because that is the last time we had lawful laws in this country.

Where do the people get their power to convene a Grand Jury? The Magna Carta, 1215.

Our Founding Fathers looked back to history for precedent when they decided they wanted to change their government. What they found was the Magna Carta Liberatum, the Great Charter of Freedoms. It set a precedent that changed the face of England forever, by establishing that the King was not above the law.

King John of England signed the Magna Carta after immense pressure from the Church and his barons (the people). The King often lived above the law, violating both Feudal and Common Law, and was heavily criticized for his foreign policy and actions in England. The Barons, with the support of the Church, pressured King John to spell out a list of their rights and guarantee that those rights would be enforced. The Barons provided a draft, and after some negotiation, King John put his seal to the Magna Carta in Runnymede, in June of 1215.

Section 61 set rules for establishing the Grand Jury. It states: Since we have granted all these things for God, for the better ordering of our kingdom, and to allay the discord that has arisen between us and our barons (people), and since we desire that they shall be enjoyed in their entirety, with lasting strength, forever, we give and grant to the barons the following security: The barons shall elect twenty-five of their number to keep, and cause to be observed with all their might, the peace and liberties granted and confirmed to them by this charter. If we, our chief justice, our officials, or any of our servants offend in any respect against any man, or transgress any of the articles of the peace or of this security, and the offense is made known to four of the said twenty-five barons, they shall come to us.”

Well. Lots of luck with that one folks!

At this point, it should be evident to anyone with a cranial capacity the size of a tea cup that FORCE is the deciding factor, not law. So, all of you cowpokes who want the original Constitution back better pony up and lock & load. And, be prepared to kill your brothers in uniform who have missed a few classes in history. Does CIVIL WAR come to mind? THAT is what it will take to get your precious De Jure Constitution back. Not ready for that? Well then, go back to bitching about those scumbags in congress who are laughing their fat ass off, and getting rich in the process. OH, and don’t forget to vote!

Fellow American’s, there is thousands of citizen’s out there that have a far higher comprehension of this legal crap than I do, and for many years they have tried this and that to regain our beloved Constitution and rule of law, but for every attempt, nothing has worked, and will not in the future unless the entire Nation is re-educated, which I cannot see happening. Do not mis-understand my sarcasm, it is the result of a heart broken old man that truly feels a sense of responsibility for this mess, and a deep shame for my fellow citizens who prefer slavery over death on the field of battle. Is life in bondage so precious that you would accept it without a fight? As for me, I would rather be a quadriplegic than give respect to these Bastards in DC, and only my advanced age and lack of strength keeps me from sending as many of them as possible to hell where they belong. PLEASE,,, read this article over and over, until you feel like a man who has just been notified his wife and daughters have been raped and murdered. Only then will you understand my rage!

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

Thomas Jefferson  

TYRANNY

 

                

 

 

 

First Ever Blueprints for World Government Revealed

April 25th, 2012 by

 

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2012/04/20/first-ever-blueprints-for-world-government-revealed/

Posted By Truther

The campaign for World Government (A Globalist backed institution) in 1942 created a manifesto for how a World Government is to be formed.

Written by Rosika Schwimmer (born on September 11, 1877, a self labeled socialist) and Lola Maverick Lloyd (self proclaimed pioneer of the movement for world government), with the aid of the Globalists, tried to establish World Government in response to the failures of the League of Nations.

In 1937, both Rosika Schwimmer and Lola Maverick Lloyd formed the Campaign for World Government in order to achieve a society that is fee of borders, centralized and controlled by the most powerful and elite.

There is now no doubt that the Globalists are actively seeking to introduce World Government and now we have evidence of what could be described as the first written record of how the Globalists are planning to introduce World Government.

Blueprints for World Government

Immediate Action

The main lines of this blueprint for governmental or unofficial action to organize the world were drawn in 1924. We revised our work and published the present pamphlet in 1937. This is the fourth edition. Believing government initiation of world union to be at present not only hopeless but even undesirable, we wish to emphasize the part of our plan designed for unofficial action. Immediate action along unofficial lines is imperative.

We have seen our globe in not time turned into one armed camp. We can transform it as quickly into a fit home for the human family. Self-made governments in exile have for military purposes been grouped with the greater powers into the “United Nations”. As the first step in peaceful achievement of world union, we urge the immediate creation of the self-made Provisional World Government to take all the unofficial action recommended in our original plan. Its world-wide announcement must include an appeal to all people to lay down their arms and prepare to participate in creating the new world order.

 

The only chance of creating the long-overdue federalized world government, all inclusive, non-military and democratic in its structure, is to stop this war before either belligerent is exhausted. Men and women of supreme integrity and imaginative daring must rise and lead mankind into their new safe road. Good plans have long been ready.

Internationally controlled demarcation lines must be established between the hostile forces, immobilizing them. They can cooperate in local reconstruction work until world organization has reached the stage where its own federal commissions can supervise their systematic demobilization and immediate absorption into planned creative work on a global scale.

The Provisional World Government in continuous session with full publicity shall draw up the World Constitution. Simultaneously it shall be prepared to assume the impartial administration of scientifically planned emergency relief of starving populations. It shall also receive complaints, accusations and claims against individuals, groups and nations for proper preparations and submission to courts to be established under the World Constitution.

If we fail, the war leaders will carry on to the exhaustion of one or both sides. After exhaustion will follow chaos, revolution, dictatorship and recurring global war until the human family destroys itself.

The prerequisite of Provisional World Government is headquarters and a fund of millions to begin unofficially on world organization, the only hopeful basis for immediate cessation of hostilities and a warless future.

There must exist men and women able to provide the means who sincerely and passionately desire world peace.

The life of mankind is at stake.

 

Lola Maverick Lloyd and Rosika Schwimmer

November 11, 1942

The Plan

The following outline for international action is addressed to all those who agree that we must stop theorizing about peace and put the best existing theories into practice. It offers an answer to the question, “How can we start practical action to establish world peace now?” It presents the preliminary steps necessary for a representative World Convention to draft the best possible constitution for an all-inclusive, non-military, democratic Federation of Nations.

Plan for Governmental Action

The President of the United States or in other countries the comparable governmental authority shall invite a small group of experts in voting methods to formulate the best practical method for the democratic election in all countries alike of delegates to a World Constitutional Convention. The Committee of Experts shall meet not later than four weeks after appointment and at the earliest possible moment make their recommendations simultaneously to the governments and the public, using the most effective channels of communication to reach all the people.

Congress or the parliaments at the same time that they adopt the report of the Committee of Experts shall legislate to start the recommended machinery for the organization of the World Constitutional Convention. Not later than three months after the law is passed delegates to the Constitutional Convention shall be nationally elected.

No member or departmental head of the military or naval forces or of the national governments of any nation shall be eligible in any capacity whatsoever for participation in the preparation or the proceedings of the World Constitutional Convention.

As soon as at least six nations have elected and officially appointed their delegates to the World Constitutional Convention, the delegates shall assemble and open their sessions without delay; the delegates from the other countries to join them as soon as elected.

The convention shall meet in the country which first invites it.

If Governments Do Not Act

If neither the President of the United States nor any other government acts, organizations or individuals shall raise the necessary funds and invite a small group of experts in voting methods to formulate the best practical method for the democratic election in all countries alike of delegates to a World Constitutional Convention. The unofficial Committee of Experts shall be regulated as to time of meeting and other duties by the rules given above for the official Committee of Experts except that they shall prepare two plans for the World Constitutional Convention, one for governmental action, if at that stage governments are ready to act, and the other to be used if government are not ready to act.

In case world organization must continue unofficially, international-minded individuals shall be chosen as delegates by the method recommended by the unofficial Committee of Experts. The delegates shall meet and function as an unofficial World Constitutional Convention. They shall draft a complete Constitution regulating the federal life of the human family in a superstructure where the states are free to develop independently, their national sovereignty being unlimited except where their interdependence requires federal regulation.

The duty of the Convention is to draw up a detailed plan for the political, economic, and social cooperation of all the nations. It shall also propose a place for the permanent location of the world parliament and an equitable division of its expenses. Within one year it shall simultaneously publish its plan and present it to all the governments of the world.

The World Constitution shall first be urged on all governments for adoption. After one year, if no government has agreed to initiate the recommended steps, unofficial steps must be taken by the people to inaugurate the all-inclusive, non-military, democratic Federation of Nations.

Tentative Plan for the Federation of Nations

In order to clarify and offer our demands in such a shape that they can serve as a basis of discussion for the World Constitutional Convention, we submit the following outline of the Federation of Nations:

The individual development of member states is left to their own decision except where it may conflict with world welfare. The world government must control the international relations between states. This situation will be similar to that between the states and the federal government in the United States of America, or that between the cantons and the federal government of Switzerland.

All the sixty-four states of the world are to be admitted immediately and unconditionally. There shall be but one class of membership.

The Federation of Nations must be a democratic league controlled by direct representation of the peoples and not by governments and bureaucracies.

To achieve the direct representation of the peoples to the Federation of Nations all states shall adopt for the election of their delegates the voting system recommended by the Committee of Experts on voting methods.

The organs of the Federation of Nations shall be a World Parliament, an Executive Board, and a Permanent Secretary.

Each state shall elect ten delegates and ten alternates to the World Parliament for a term of ten years. They shall be subject to recall by their own electorate.

The votes of the delegates in the World Parliament shall be counted individually and not by nations. Delegates from any state may differ among themselves on any issue and will find similar differences in other delegations. Every important group in a nation can be represented among its ten delegates, and will find like-minded groups from other nations in the World Parliament, where divisions will consequently occur along lines of opinion, not lines of geography. No unanimous vote on any question shall be required from a national delegation.

The delegates shall organize the World Parliament and elect a president, a vice-president, an executive board and all the necessary commissions, employing the voting system recommended by the Committee of Experts. Temporary or permanent vacancies shall be filled by the originally elected alternates.

The World Parliament shall be in session the first three months of every year. Sessions may be prolonged or reassembled by vote of the delegates to the World Parliament.

All sessions of the World Parliament must be public, and an official summary of its proceedings must be furnished daily to the press.

The Executive Board and the Permanent Secretary shall carry on the business of the World Parliament and shall reside permanently at its sear. For administrative purposes regional headquarters shall be established on all continents. Regional secretaries shall be chosen by the World Parliament. These continental offices will have direct communication – telegraph, telephone and wireless – and a central broadcasting station will be operated.

The commissions will be entitled to employ experts and any other help necessary to the extent of the appropriations voted them by the World Parliament.

While every delegate shall have the right to use his own language in Parliament, for the auxiliary world language we recommend English, as it is already used as auxiliary language by a larger number of people than any other language.

While every nation, race or religion is free to use its traditional reckoning of time, we recommend that the World Parliament count its official time from that year in which world unity shall be attained. The consummation of world unification, the most important date in history, will be the point from which an adult world will reckon time.

Federal Commissions to Be Organized

I. Economic

A) Commission to plan industrial, agricultural, technical, engineering, scientific and other work extensive enough to absorb the millions liberated by the abandonment of the war system and also to take care of all the unemployed of the world. The abolition of armies, navies, air fleets, armaments and munition factories in all the states of the world will release for this vast reemployment scheme the scrapped war material and enormous sums heretofore provided in open and concealed war budgets.

B) Commission to plan the regulation of the world’s production of raw materials and the control of its distribution according to the needs of all nations, thus removing the excuse for forcible conquest of territory and for continued existence of empires, colonies, mandates.

C) Commission to plan the abolition of all tariffs and customs and the establishment of free trade between all nations and to act as Arbitration Board in trade disputes between member states.

D) Commission on transportation and communication for international control of traffic between states by railways and waterways, by automobile transportation and aviation, and of the postal, telegraph, telephone and radio services.

E) Commission to plan the regulation of world finance and to evolve a uniform monetary system.

II. Legal

F) Commission to prepare the code of international laws and to plan executive machinery for their administration and courts for their adjudication.

G) Commission on international relations for reorganizing the existing machinery (Diplomacy) of political contact and intercourse between nations.

H) Commission to plan and set up national arbitration bodies for the settlement of internal disputes which may cause civil war, and to set up a federal body to which national arbitration cases may be appealed.

I) Commission to plan and carry out the elimination of capital punishment in all states, and to set up institutions in which criminals formerly subject to capital punishment shall be incarcerated for scientific study and treatment.

III. Population Questions

J) Commission for solving population problems by planned relief of overpopulated regions and thus removing an excuse of aggressive militarists for wars of conquest.

  1. By transfer of population to undeveloped territories and under-populated regions, migration never to be compulsory but induced by making the under-populated regions and undeveloped territories offer better opportunities.
  2. By legalization of birth-control.

K) Commission on world citizenship to regulate the rights and duties of citizens of the Federation of Nations. In addition to equal world citizenship each human being shall have the rights and duties of a citizen of the nation where he resides.

IV. Miscellaneous

L) Commission on education to plan educational opportunities for all children. Textbooks and other materials for education shall be based on unbiased facts, and history shall be taught from the world point of view, emphasizing the moral, economic, scientific and artistic contributions to mankind’s progress and happiness by all nations, races, classes, creeds and both sexes.

M) Health commission for scientific and practical research into all hygienic problems and for planning adequate health service.

N) Commission to prepare international legislation to safeguard historically truthful presentation of news by the press, screen and radio and to protect the honor of nations and individuals through national and international Press-Juries, Courts of Honor and similar forums.

Other commissions shall be organized by the World Parliament as needed.

We cannot overemphasize the importance of choosing at every stage of procedure the right personnel. We must not repeat the mistake of the Hague Conferences and the Disarmament Conference of 1932 where high international aims were frustrated by delegates who lacked the world viewpoint. Only international-minded men and women can be trusted to reorganize human society on a safe basis.

Conspiracy

ROTHSCHILDS WANT IRANS BANKS

April 24th, 2012 by

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=2743

By Pete Papaherakles

Could gaining control of the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran (CBI) be one of the main reasons that Iran is being targeted by Western and Israeli powers? As tensions are building up for an unthinkable war with Iran, it is worth exploring Iran’s banking system compared to its U.S., British and Israeli counterparts.

Some researchers are pointing out that Iran is one of only three countries left in the world whose central bank is not under Rothschild control. Before 9-11 there were reportedly seven: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea and Iran. By 2003, however, Afghanistan and Iraq were swallowed up by the Rothschild octopus, and by 2011 Sudan and Libya were also gone. In Libya, a Rothschild bank was established in Benghazi while the country was still at war.

Islam forbids the charging of interest, a major problem for the Rothschild banking system. Until a few hundred years ago, charging interest was also forbidden in the Christian world and was even punishable by death. It was considered exploitation and enslavement.

Since the Rothschilds took over the Bank of England around 1815, they have been expanding their banking control over all the countries of the world. Their method has been to get a country’s corrupt politicians to accept massive loans, which they can never repay, and thus go into debt to the Rothschild banking powers. If a leader refuses to accept the loan, he is oftentimes either ousted or assassinated. And if that fails, invasions can follow, and a Rothschild usury-based bank is established.

The Rothschilds exert powerful influence over the world’s major news agencies. By repetition, the masses are duped into believing horror stories about evil villains. The Rothschilds control the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, the IMF, the World Bank and the Bank of International Settlements. Also they own most of the gold in the world as well as the London Gold Exchange, which sets the price of gold every day. It is said the family owns over half the wealth of the planet—estimated by Credit Suisse to be $231 trillion—and is controlled by Evelyn Rothschild, the current head of the family.

Objective researchers contend that Iran is not being demonized because they are a nuclear threat, just as the Taliban, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Muammar Qadaffi were not a threat.

What then is the real reason? Is it the trillions to be made in oil profits, or the trillions in war profits? Is it to bankrupt the U.S. economy, or is it to start World War III? Is it to destroy Israel’s enemies, or to destroy the Iranian central bank so that no one is left to defy Rothschild’s money racket?

It might be any one of those reasons or, worse—it might be all of them.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Anyone who has read my two sites and newsletters already knows what I think about the Rothschild family, but for the benefit of any new reader let me make it short and sweet. The whole family should be exterminated, along with the other seven families that comprise their cartel. If that offends anyone’s sensibilities, tough shit!

Any person with more than one inch between their ears can find volume’s of information about them to justify their extermination. Let their entire blood line be wiped from the face of the earth, and their souls be tormented in hell for eternity.

If I were President of the United States Corporation which is owned lock stock and barrel by the members of the International Investment Banking Cartel, I would gather together the leaders of the earth’s governments and demand their support in the elimination of the entire Cartel. Shortly, there would be peace on earth, as the major cancer of human societies would be gone forever.

Read all of the articles on http://anationbeguiled.com and http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com  before you decide I am a loose cannon and report me to your hero’s in DC.

Let this be a warning to all on planet earth. You will shortly see atrocities on earth beyond your imagination, if you don’t do your home work and conclude that I am right, and demand from your leaders their extermination.

This is the single most important thing you will ever do in your lifetime!

The atrocities this family is directly responsible for in the history of their existence is mind numbing and irreputable proof of humanities stupidity.

The banking cartel should have been eliminated centuries ago and prohibited from ever coming back.

To kill a snake, cut off it’s damn head,

and usuery is the most most poisoness vipor of humanity.

 

GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION

 

Why Is It Necessary For The Federal Government To Turn The United States Into A Prison Camp?

April 23rd, 2012 by

http://www.prisonplanet.com/why-is-it-necessary-for-the-federal-government-to-turn-the-united-states-into-a-prison-camp.html

Economic Collapse Blog

There has been no society in the history of the world that has ever been 100% safe.  No matter how much money the federal government spends on “homeland security”, the truth is that bad things will still happen.  Our world is a very dangerous place and it is becoming increasingly unstable.  The federal government could turn the entire country into one giant prison camp, but that would still not keep us safe.  It is inevitable that bad stuff will happen in life.  But we have a choice.  We can choose to live in fear or we can choose to live as free men and women.  Our forefathers intended to establish a nation where liberty and freedom would be maximized.  But today we are told that we have to give up our liberties and our freedoms and our privacy for increased security.  But is such a trade really worth it?  Just think of the various totalitarian societies that we have seen down throughout history.  Have any of them ever really thrived?  Have their people been happy?  Unfortunately, the U.S. federal government has decided that the entire country needs to be put on lock down.  Nearly everything that we do today is watched and tracked, and personal privacy is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.  Many of the things that George Orwell wrote about in 1984 are becoming a reality, and that is a very frightening thing.  The United States is supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave.  Sadly, we are rapidly becoming the exact opposite of that.

I don’t know about you, but I never signed up to live in North Korea.  When I was growing up I was taught that repressive regimes such as North Korea are “the bad guys” and that America is where “the good guys” live.

So why do we want to be just like North Korea?

When they put in the naked body scanners at U.S. airports and started having TSA agents conduct “enhanced pat-downs” of travelers, I decided that I was not going to fly anymore unless absolutely necessary.

Then I heard about how “random bag checks” were being conducted at Metro train stations in the Washington D.C. area, and I was glad that I was no longer taking the train into D.C. anymore.

But now the TSA is showing up everywhere.  Down in Houston, undercover TSA agents and police officers will now “ride buses, perform random bag checks, and conduct K-9 sweeps, as well as place uniformed and plainclothes officers at Transit Centers and rail platforms to detect, prevent and address latent criminal activity or behavior.”

So now I have another thing to add to my list of things that I can’t do anymore.

No more riding buses for me.

But the truth is that you can’t escape this expanding security grid no matter how hard you try.

In fact, TSA “VIPR teams” conduct approximately 8,000 “unannounced security screenings”every year at bus terminals, train stations, ports and highway rest stops throughout the United States.

Look, every society needs some level of security.  There are always bad guys out there that want to harm innocent people.

But in the United States we must demand that those in charge of our security do their jobs in a way that does not compromise our dignity, our liberties or our freedoms.

Does having TSA thugs touch the private parts of old women and young children before they get on their flights keep us any safer?

Of course not.

But it does move our country in a very dangerous direction.

The reality is that this “Big Brother control grid” that is being constructed all around us is expanding in a thousand different ways.

For example, a new bill before the U.S. Congress would require black box data recorders to be installed in all new vehicles starting in 2015.  These black box data recorders will be able to constantly transmit data about everything that your car is  doing to the government and to the insurance companies.  The following is from a recent article by Eric Peters….

And naturally, they – the government, insurance companies – will be able to track your every move, noting (and recording) where you’ve been and when. This will create a surveillance net beyond anything that ever existed previously. Some will not sweat this: After all, if you’ve got nothing to hide, why worry? Except for the fact that, courtesy of almost everything we do being either “illegal” or at least “suspicious” we all have a great deal to hide. The naivety of the Don’t Worry, it’s No Big Deal crowd is breathtaking. Did the average Soviet citizen also “not have anything to hide,” and hence why worry?

But the last possibility is probably the creepiest possibility: EDRs tied into your car’s GPS will give them – the government and its corporate **** ******* (edited for language) – literal physical control over (hack) “your” vehicle. This is not conspiracy theorizing. It is technological fact. Current GM vehicles equipped with the same technology about to be mandated for every vehicle can be disabled remotely. Just turned off. All the OnStar operator has to do is send the appropriate command over the GPS to your car’s computer, which controls the engine. It is one of the features touted by OnStar – of course, as a “safety” feature.

In the future, it will be used to limit your driving – for the sake of “energy conservation” or perhaps, “the environment.” It will be the perfect, er, vehicle, for implementing U.N. Agenda 21 – the plan to herd all of us formerly free-range tax cattle into urban feedlots. So much easier to control us this way. No more bailing out to the country or living off the grid – unless you get there (and to your work) by walking.

Even when you are sitting at home you are still being watched and monitored in countless ways.

For example, every single call you make on your cell phone is intercepted and monitored by the government.

Your Internet activity is tracked and monitored by a whole host of government agencies as well.  If you doubt this, just read this article.

Now CISPA would expand government surveillance of the Internet even further.  The following description of CISPA comes from the Electronic Frontier Foundation website….

CISPA creates an exception to all privacy laws to permit companies to share our information with each other and with the government in the name of cybersecurity…. CISPA’s ‘information sharing’ regime allows the transfer of vast amounts of data, including sensitive information like internet use history or the content of emails, to any agency in the government including military and intelligence agencies like the National Security Agency or the Department of Defense Cyber Command. Once in government hands, this information can be used for any non-regulatory purpose so long as one significant purpose is for cybersecurity or to protect national security.

Frightening stuff, eh?

I want you to imagine a scenario for a moment.  Imagine that the government assigned two “watchers” to you that followed you everywhere you went and stared directly into your face the entire time.

Would you feel comfortable?

Why not?

You don’t have anything to hide, do you?

Well, of course the truth is that none of us would like having our privacy constantly invaded.  It is not pleasant to constantly feel like you are being watched.

That is why all of these new “security measures” are so alarming.  A system is being set up where all of us are being constantly watched and monitored 24 hours a day.

And most Americans have no idea how fast the transition to full martial law could potentially be.

Barack Obama recently updated an old executive order that has been around for decades that would enable him to take charge of all food, all energy, all health resources and all transportation resources in the United States with the stroke of a pen.  This new update would allow him to do it even in “non-emergency” situations.

The following is what U.S. Representative Kay Granger recently had to say about this executive order….

This means all of our water resources, construction services and materials (steel, concrete, etc.), our civil transportation system, food and health resources, our energy supplies including oil and natural gas – even farm equipment – can be taken over by the President and his cabinet secretaries.  The Government can also draft U.S. citizens into the military and force U.S. citizens to fulfill “labor requirements” for the purposes of “national defense.”  There is not even any Congressional oversight, only briefings are required.

Later on in her letter, Representative Granger even used the phrases “martial law” and “government takeover” to describe the power that Barack Obama potentially has under this executive order….

It is still unclear why this order was signed now, and what the consequences are for our nation – especially during times of peace.  This type of Martial Law imposes a government takeover on U.S. citizens that is typically reserved for national emergencies, not in a time of relative peace.

Do you trust Barack Obama with that kind of power?

Unfortunately, considering the really bad decisions that all of our government officials regularly make, it is really hard to trust any of them to do the right thing at this point.

The American people need to let their voices be heard on these issues.  If not, the federal government will continue to strip away our privacy, our liberties and our freedoms until everything is gone.

Do you want your children to grow up in a country that has been turned into a giant prison camp and that more closely resembles North Korea than it does the nation that our forefathers originally founded?

If not, please do what you can to speak out against these abuses.

The truth is that the federal government does not really even care about our national security anyway.

If they did, they would secure our borders.  Just today I read that the National Guard is withdrawing 900 troops from the U.S.-Mexico border.  Our border security is already a total joke and now it is going to be even worse.

Over the past several decades, tens of millions of people have crossed that border illegally.  Every single day, terrorists, drug dealers, gang members, sexual predators and a whole host of other “bad guys” could be crossing that border and we would never even know about it because we aren’t doing anything to stop it.

For nearly 60 years, the U.S. government has successfully protected the border between South Korea and North Korea, but the U.S. government flatly refusesto protect our own borders.

Until the federal government decides to do what the U.S. Constitution requires them to do and start protecting our borders, then the federal government should not be asking any of us to make a single sacrifice in the name of “security”.

The truth is that we can have a reasonable level of security in this nation without giving up the liberties and the freedoms that millions of Americans have shed their blood to protect.

We do not need to turn the United States into a giant prison camp.  America is supposed to be the land of the free, and we need to work hard to get that dream back.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

The internet gives plenty of evidence that there are thousands of people like me who are spending 80 to 100 hour weeks searching for, and publishing information on how and why America is going down, but the difficulty in provoking the average citizen into participating seems to be getting harder. This seems to me to be against the human instinct for survival, and supports the claims some make that we have been chemically assaulted in various ways until the majority of American’s are now intellectually euthanized. They are faced with so many conflicting ideas that their brains cannot process them. It is like watching thousands of people taking a short cut home through a swamp full of alligators and remain unaware of the danger, because they are too tired to take the long way. I have never encountered anything so frustrating in my 71 years. Even my family ignores my warnings. They do so because they are aware of my pit-bull character when someone bites me, and I remain unable to understand how they could let someone bite them and not take their head off. Another analogy would be an army of one thousand facing an army of one million and deciding to surrender, when they have seen with their own eyes how that army brutalizes their prisoners. How can one account for such mind numbing cowardice? If we cannot inspire fifty million citizens to get educated and infuriated from their new knowledge, all that is left is to charge the million-man army with our bare hands, because they are intent on disarming us. Please folks, for the love of sanity, get educated, and get really pissed off. Being a slave is NOT AN OPTION FOR THIS OLDDOG, AND YOU WON’T LIKE IT EITHER. I’m beginning to feel like a Marine recruiter in a kindergarten.

Police State Indoctrination of the Young

http://docmedina.blogspot.com/2012/04/police-state-indoctrination-of-young.html

A police officer walks into a middle school classroom. No, this is not the opening line of a joke, this actually happened at a local school and maybe happening in a school near you. The police officer proceeded to tell the class that, disrupting the class was a felony and she would have no problem arresting a kid, taking them directly to jail, and not even calling the kids' parents. This from an officer said to have expressed her desire for something to happen at school since she misses patrolling the street. 

Another interesting point is that this teacher had, only a few months back, covered The Constitution and Bill of Rights in her classes. The same teacher then brought in a uniformed officer to tell kids their rights would be trampled if they dared disrupt the class. During my time in school it was not uncommon that a class would have 36 students, some of them unruly, to one teacher. Yet, I don't remember a teacher ever calling an officer in to handle their classroom for them. 

What of the officer attempting to help the ineffective teacher? We the people delegate our power to a select few public servants to keep order in our community. We trust these individuals to be of good character and sound judgment. Threatening school kids with violating their civil rights seems to be outside the scope of what these "officials" (public servants) are paid to do. If an officer ever decides to act in this manner with a child, the taxpayers will be on the hook for trial expenses in defense of he officer and a settlement for a violation of civil rights. 

To further bring this issue into focus, consider the following: Say you're on your lunch break, at work, talking to a co-worker as you walk to the restroom. Just then, a police officer stops you and asks where you are going. How would you feel? How would you feel if you were a child? Just another action, the above-mentioned officer, is said to routinely take. 

The National Association of School Resource Officers had this to say about their own surveys, which are significant to expanding the program and obtaining funding: "NASRO surveys are intentionally not designed as… long-term scientific academic studies." Basically they ask hundreds of SROs, while at a conference (paid vacation) if they see reasons why the program should continue (or why they should get another paid vacation when the next conference comes around). Think I may be reaching on this fact? The 2012 conference is July 15-20th at the Peppermill Resort Spa Casino in Reno, Nevada. 

According to the U.S.D.J. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention-, "The perception of imminent danger in the school environment has become common place in many communities, leaving parents, students, and school personnel with, at best a tenuous sense of security. The School Resource Officer concept offers an approach to improving school security and alleviating community fears." 

According to the reasoning of a combat veteran, having seen the frailty of human life first hand, I perceive danger to be imminent in almost all aspects of daily life. Should we have police at our workplace, doctors office, grocery store, and in our homes to alleviate possible fears? Our schools are turning into conditioning camps for the thriving police state our nation is quickly becoming. Parents, please talk to your children; You may find this to be common place in many schools across the land of the free and home of the brave. Doesn’t that make you sick?

 

Totalitarianism

 

 

The Obama Timeline and thoughts on restoring American liberties

April 22nd, 2012 by

http://www.colony14.net/id41.html

an excerpt from The Obama Timeline

By Don Fredrick

Obama was hired by Miner, Banhill and Galland, a law firm which specializes in negotiating government contracts to develop low-income housing, and that dealt with Tony Rezko’s firm Rezar. Obama’s specific duties at the law firm are not known. (He refuses to provide a list of his clients.)

Obama was also a law lecturer at the University of Chicago during these years, but is believed to have never published even a single work of legal scholarship. (No Obama documents appear in the HeinOnline database of law journals.)

Obama likely remained on the payroll of the Miner law firm until his 2004 Senate campaign, although his law license became inactive in 2002. He worked only during the summers after 1996. It is believed that Obama never tried a case in court; he instead worked on teams with other lawyers to draw up briefs and contracts. Arguably, Obama never tried a case because he is perhaps unable to think on his feet… as is required in a trial setting. There is no teleprompter between the lawyer and the jury, and attorneys need skills beyond reading or memorizing stump speeches, sound bites, and talking points.)

Sometime in 1993, Michelle Obama’s law license was suspended. The Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) reported her malpractice insurance status as “No malpractice report required as attorney is on court ordered inactive status.” The ARDC is an agency of the Supreme Court of Illinois (not the Illinois Bar) which investigates attorney malpractice complaints. The inactive status is court ordered—it is not the result of a voluntary request by Michelle Obama (who had failed to pass the bar on her first attempt). The reason for the court’s suspension of the license has not been made public.

In addition to paying old parking fines, Obama relinquished his law license in early 2007 to avoid the possibility of punishment for lying on his Illinois bar application. Obama’s application failed to disclose the fact that he had used different names in the past (Barry Soetoro, and perhaps Barry Dunham), had used drugs, and had unpaid parking tickets of approximately $400. A complaint against Obama was filed on March 13, 2007, but because he had just relinquished his license, he escaped an investigation and possible punishment (such as disbarment).

It is virtually unheard of for an attorney to give up his law license, even if he goes into politics. Obama likely gave up his to avoid losing it over charges that he lied on his application. Michelle's was taken away. She did something improper but no one is talking. I assume the stories will come out after they are evicted from the White House.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

One never knows when or how they will stumble onto good fortune and today after a series of emails I was receiving from a discussion group, I read the above excerpt of Dons and asked for permission to republish, which he graciously granted.

It was a comment of mine in an email, mostly taken from my Obama Timeline at www.colony14.net. Feel free to use it; just mention The Obama Timeline.

Don Fredrick

After several hours on www.colony14.net I am an addicted fan of this extraordinary author. Please find time to enjoy this site. You will be glad you did.

The Obama Timeline

The following timeline presents the important aspects of Obama’s life, from birth to the present. Every attempt has been made to present accurate information, names, and dates. If errors or significant omissions are noted, please feel free to contact the author at colony14@gmail.com

NOTE: Thousands of hours of effort have gone into the research and creation of this timeline. This work is the intellectual property of the author and is fully protected by copyright law ©. Any non-profit re-posting or re-printing of this timeline without crediting the author (Don Fredrick at ( www.colony14.net ) and without the consent of the author is prohibited. Any for-profit re-posting or re-printing of this timeline is prohibited.

The Obama Timeline is now available in book form and can be ordered on-line from bookseller sites like Amazon.com, BAMM.com, BN.com, etc. An electronic version of the book is available directly from the publisher.

 


04 21 12 A Very Simple Job Description

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/a_very_simple_job_description.html

By Jim Yardley

President Obama complains constantly that his job is made harder because of the negative slant of the Constitution.  The job description of the president of the United States, as described in the Constitution, consists of only 322 words (Article II, Sections 2 and 3).  That's it.  Three hundred and twenty-two words.

Not 322 pages, not 322 paragraphs, not 322 sentences.  Three hundred and twenty-two words.  Period.

More than twice that many words (664, to be exact) are used in Article II, Section 1 just to define the process of choosing the president, and they include even the exact language of his oath of office.

This short job description covers only five areas:

  • The president is the commander-in-chief of the military.
  • The president is responsible for insuring that the laws passed by Congress are executed and enforced as written.
  • The president is allowed to grant pardons for crimes other than impeachment. 
  • The president can also make treaties, but only if two-thirds of the Senate agrees to the terms of those treaties.
  • The president can nominate ambassadors, Supreme Court justices, and other officers (most commonly cabinet secretaries and federal judges).  But he can only nominate them.  Again, the Senate has final approval on any nominations.

That's it.  That is all the person who is president is allowed to do by law.  He or she can persuade, lecture, and speak publicly, using, in Teddy Roosevelt's phrase, his "bully pulpit" to encourage Congress to act.  In fact, he is required by the Constitution to do exactly that.  The theatre which is the State of the Union address made annually by the president is specifically required in Article II, Section 3, which begins:

He shall from time to time give to the Congress the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient[.]

It should be noted that governance of the nation by executive order or by administrative regulation is not mentioned in those 322 words.

There was a very understandable rationale for the members of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to describe very limited powers invested in the president.  A major source of contention between the colonies and Great Britain which led to the War of Independence was the behavior of King George III.  George believed that as king, he was an absolute monarch rather than a constitutional monarch.  As far back as the year 1215, with the Magna Carta, the absolute authority of the British sovereign was purposefully limited.  King George, with support from a majority of Parliament, who agreed that the king's authority should be effectively absolute, aided and abetted this set of circumstances against nearly 600 years of precedent establishing limited sovereign authority.

With George III providing such a powerful example of what not to allow the head of government to do, the Constitutional Convention was adamant in limiting the unilateral scope of action of the president.  With the inauguration of Barack Obama, we can see clearly that these men were not paranoid, but prescient. 

Obama has acted in a way that is very similar to actions taken by George III in ignoring hundreds of years of tradition and legal precedent to enforce his whims.  This is particularly ironic behavior from a man who has written that he was greatly affected by his biological father's anti-colonialist and anti-monarchal attitudes.  One has only to look at Obama's own behavior to see that he himself tries to rule like a monarch in the mold of George III or Louis XIV, who famously said. "I am the State."  (Of course, ol' Louis actually said "L'état, c'est moi," but then he was French, after all.)  Obama governs as if Washington, D.C. was the mother country and the 50 states are just colonies that he too can rule according to his whim while ignoring hundreds of years of our history, tradition, and legal precedent.

Perhaps Barack Obama should examine what he is actually allowed to do and what he is actually supposed to do, and limit himself to those only.  If not, there is a very strong chance that history will repeat itself, as it does from time to time.  Over two centuries ago, the American people threw off a despot, and there is a high likelihood that such might be repeated on November 6.  One hopes this second removal from power will be accomplished with significantly less violence and loss of life than the first one was in 1776.

I would also like to hear from all the remaining Republican candidates a list of what they guarantee they will not do if they become president.  For example, they will not kill American citizens without arrest, indictment, and trial.  They will not try to allocate resources within the economy because they feel that the market's allocation of those resources is not as efficient as they might like.  They will not sign legislation that is of questionable constitutional validity.  If each of these candidates made a speech telling Americans what they will not do, not only would it be one helluva speech, but it would draw a strong contrasting picture of how they see the job as president when compared to how Barack Obama sees it.

Jim Yardley is a retired financial controller for manufacturing firms, a Vietnam veteran, and an independent voter.  Jim blogs at http://jimyardley.wordpress.com, or he can be contacted directly at james.v.yardley@gmail.com .

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/a_very_simple_job

_description.html#ixzz1sgWsXMbi

 

More From American Thinker

From Around the Web

Read more: 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/a_very

_simple_job_description.html#ixzz1sgibls2X

Stand your ground.

April 20th, 2012 by

Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here."

attributed to Captain John Parker, Massachusetts militia,  on Lexington green, 4/19/1775

 

I want to ask you to do me a favor. Mark your calendar for this coming Thursday the 19th. I'm sure that most of your calendars don't highlight that day. I know for sure the left and the media will not remind you.

 

On that day,  April 19 1775,  237 years ago, a group of patriots decided they had had enough and stood their ground at Lexington and Concord. They had had enough of tyranny, abuse by their government, and over bearing taxes. Sound familiar?

 

Take a moment on Thursday and reflect on the meaning of that day. Think of the risks those patriots were willing to take in order to win their freedom. I believe the most important freedom is that of 'Freedom of Choice.' Also, think of what has happened to this great Republic in the last few generations. Let us all endeavor to ensure that their sacrifice, and of those since, was not in vain.

 

BTW: Don't forget that the mission of the British that day was to confiscate weapons.

When the Spartans at Thermopylae were ordered by the Persians to surrender their weapons, they responded Molon Labe — "Come and Take them"

That is my response to anyone who would disarm me and mine.

To a warrior, the golf course is a willful and deliberate misuse of a perfectly good rifle range!

The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.
Visit Constitutional Emergency at: http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Food for thought! Would you stand with me if we faced our own troops? Do you understand WHO our real enemy is?

I know some of you reading this have not been doing your home work and are unaware of what has happened to America, and to you I will be perceived as another hot headed old man unwilling to merge with the newer generation, to that, I say you still have your head up your ass, you are too lazy to do the research, too cowardly to accept reality, and too stupid to recognize the danger imposed on us by our own government. Surely, if you knew what is really going on in DC, you would be burning up the phone lines to Congress, writing letters to them daily, and telling them what you really think of them, and you are not going down without a fight. Look around your neighborhood, do you not see a lack of activity, are you staying home more so than in the past? Are you even aware of how much America has changed in the past three years, let alone the past generation? Do you have any idea of how you are going to live in the next decade? Why are you not infuriated all the time? Do you really believe that shit just happens, and does not require a purposeful action to instigate it? Mark these words, we will not be able to go to the store and buy food, without permission in the near future, or afford the gas to drive there, and the only way this is going to stop is for you to become aware of reality, get really pissed off, and get on the governments ass, and stay there until they squeal. We need fifty million pissed off American’s to stop this, and you need to be one of them! Start learning! Get mad! STAND UP! Be prepared to die fighting for our freedom!

Let me know if you don’t know where to start! olddog@anationbeguiled.com

 

Totalitarianism

 

 

FORGERY-GATE: DEMAND A SPECIAL COUNSEL APPOINTMENT!

April 17th, 2012 by

http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd531.htm

By: Devvy
April 16, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro aka Barry Dunham aka Barack Dunham – all known aliases of the occupant in the White House. I will refer to him as Barry Soetoro since that appears to be the last known legal name of the mystery man.

Over the past four years I have followed every case filed, read every brief submitted and a million words on the constitutional meaning of 'natural born citizen'. Only those in denial or whose ideological agenda depends on Barry staying in office refuse to acknowledge that Soetoro was born with dual citizenship. He was ineligible in 2008 and he's still ineligible in 2012.

In the only oral arguments to actually take place out in Georgia, the end result has been the same. Two weeks ago, the Georgia Supreme Court checked their manhood at the door and ruled against all the plaintiffs. Those judges followed the cowardly path taken by Judge Mahili in his original decision to allow Barry on the Georgia ballot despite the undeniable legal facts presented by plaintiffs during the original hearings. However, what the Georgia Supreme Court did was even more reprehensible according to Van Irion, Liberty Legal Foundation, who represented David Welden:

"Both LLF and Georgia Representative Mark Hatfield pointed out to the Court the date on which the Secretary of State planned to certify the election. Yet the Court sat on our filings for seven days, then ruled on the day certification had been planned. If we had been given one or two days we could have filed an emergency motion with the U.S. Supreme Court. Currently the Justice assigned to review such motions from Georgia is the most Constitutional originalist, Justice Clarence Thomas. I'm sure that the Georgia Supreme Court is aware that Justice Thomas would have been our next step, had we had time to file another motion. The Georgia Court ensured that such review was not possible by waiting until the last day to rule before our motion became moot. It is possible that this timing was nothing more than a busy court not being able to rule faster, but after what we have seen in Georgia, do you believe that? Even if that is true, what does it say about this Court's level of respect for the importance of this case? The Court didn't even bother to spell our client's name correctly! I believe that this latest ruling proves that Georgia law does not apply to the powerful."

As I have written in many columns, Barry cannot be impeached. He usurped the office of the presidency. The only legal method to remove him is through the Quo Warranto statute. A proper QW was filed on January 3, 2012, by presidential candidate, Montgomery Blair Sibley. He filed a Certified Petition for Writs Quo Warranto and Mandamus in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the proper legal forum. The judge, Amy Jackson Berman, apparently doesn't have the courage to address this issue because she has refused to respond.

Forty days after Sibley's filing, the District Court Judge had not ruled on any part of the suit, so he filed a petition for mandamus with the Circuit Court of Appeal. The Appeals Court then ruled: “The district court's delay in ruling on the petition for writ of quo warranto is not so egregious or unreasonable as to warrant the extraordinary remedy of mandamus.” Sibley then filed with the U.S. Supreme Court: "On April 20, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether to fast-track the determination of Obama's constitutional eligibility to be President."

Unfortunately, a new effort is underway and being heavily promoted by popular talk show hosts like Alex Jones. 'Impeach 2012' is a project by Sean Stone, son of movie producer, Oliver Stone. Another wasted effort by someone who, while his intentions may be from the heart, apparently has zero understanding of the constitutional problem of impeaching someone who never held the office. THAT is the meat of the legal issue. Alex Jones has had Dr. Edwin Vieria on his show several times and I believe he respects Edwin's undisputed status as an expert on constitutional issues. Edwin addressed this issue back in 2008:

"Seventh, if Obama does become an usurper posturing as “the President,” Congress cannot even impeach him because, not being the actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (see Article II, Section 4). In that case, some other public officials would have to arrest him­with physical force, if he would not go along quietly­in order to prevent him from continuing his imposture. Obviously, this could possibly lead to armed conflicts within the General Government itself, or among the States and the people.

"Eighth, even did something approaching civil war not eventuate from Obama’s hypothetical usurpation, if the Establishment allowed Obama to pretend to be “the President,” and the people acquiesced in that charade, just about everything that was done during his faux “tenure in office” by anyone connected with the Executive Branch of the General Government, and quite a bit done by the Legislative Branch and perhaps the Judicial Branch as well, would be arguably illegitimate and subject to being overturned when a constitutional President was finally installed in office. The potential for chaos, both domestically and internationally, arising out of this systemic uncertainty is breathtaking.

"The underlying problem will not be obviated if Obama, his partisans in the Democratic Party, and his cheerleaders and cover-up artists in the big media simply stonewall the issue of his (non) citizenship and contrive for him to win the Presidential election. The cat is already out of the bag and running all over the Internet. If he continues to dodge the issue, Obama will be dogged with this question every day of his purported “Presidency.”

I can't tell you how many emails I've received over the past few years from "patriots" who say they don't care whether or not he can't be impeached from a constitutional prospective, "we" have to impeach him anyway to get him out of office!

That position is no different than those we battle against who care nothing for the U.S. Constitution regarding Barry and his ineligibility. Two wrongs do not make a right. Don't people get it yet? Don't they understand if you play the game by their rules you will lose every time?

There will be no impeachment by the Outlaw Congress. Fact challenged, U.S. Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr., [R-NC] has introduced a resolution to impeach for high crimes and misdemeanors except that as a usurper, Soetoro never had legal authority to act as Commander-in-Chief.

The Republicans know such a resolution will go no where. It was introduced March 7, 2012, and has a grand total of 2 co-sponsors. As Bush was to Pelosi, Barry is to the GOP for the 2012 elections. The deal makers in the Outlaw Congress are fully aware that we the people know they are responsible for allowing the electoral college vote to proceed on January 9, 2009, installing an impostor president in the White House. Jones' resolution is simply throwing scraps to the peasants to appease. Keep them herded in the wrong direction which protects the gross negligence by every incumbent on January 9, 2009.

Those who continue to spend time and money on an impeachment are working for the wrong side whether they know it or not. If Soetoro's "presidency" is allowed to stand as legitimate, again, it will set one of the worst legal precedents in the history of this country. I hope that people like Alex Jones will stop promoting that effort.

While Sheriff Joe's Cold Posse continues their investigation, is there any other legal method to remove Barry from the White House? You can't say remove him from office since he was never eligible to run in 2008. Because Barry was never eligible to be on the ballot in any state, no one had the right to vote for him in 2008.

There's no question Soetoro's Selective Service Registration Card is a forgery. I don't believe there's doubt any longer he has been using someone else's social security number. The birth certificate he has presented to the world is a forgery. But, how do we legally deal with it as we wait to see what the U.S. Supreme Court decides on April 20, 2012, and beyond?

By demanding a special prosecutor be appointed to deal with only one issue: The forged birth certificate. The role of a special counsel is to investigate wrong doing by the Executive Branch. Barry Soetoro released a forged document in his "official" capacity on April 27, 2011. He "owns it" now and for that alone, a special counsel could be appointed.

Why not include the forged Selective Service (SS) card and use of someone else's social security number (SSN) to a special counsel? Because the SS card forgery was committed before he was "elected". I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say whether or not Barry can still be indicted and prosecuted under federal law for forging his SS registration form. The statute of limitations might have already run.

As for using someone else's SSN, Soetoro can weasel out of that one by saying his deceased mother applied for the number while he was a minor and he never had reason to question it. (Smirk)

Second, and I didn't believe it until I read the cases, courts have now given the green light in promoting identify theft. In 2010, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that a man who used his real name but someone else's Social Security number to obtain a car loan was not guilty of "criminal impersonation," overturning convictions by lower courts. That followed a ruling the prior year by the U.S. Supreme Court, quote: "A Mexican man who gave a false SSN to get a job at an Illinois steel plant could not be convicted under federal identity theft laws because he did not knowingly use another person's identifying number. The ruling overturned an opinion by a federal appeals court in St. Louis — and contradicted earlier findings by circuit courts in the Southeast, upper Midwest and the Gulf states."

Oh, that's right. That thief used someone else's SSN to get a job, but didn't commit a crime because he "did not knowingly use another person's identifying number". Well, just whose number did that thief think he was using since it wasn't his own? Those judges should be thrown off the bench for literally opening the door for more identity theft ruining people's lives.

Soetoro can be indicted and prosecuted after he leaves "office" for carrying out a "scheme to defraud" the public via his "dishonest services"; United States v. Frega, 179 F.3d 793 (9th Cir. 1999). He most certainly can be indicted, and hopefully convicted, under the wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. §1343. That is not idle speculation. The impostor president, knowing he was ineligible, solicited campaign funds via television, radio and the Internet to the tune of about $700 million dollars. Those charges alone, if convicted, would put him in federal prison for a long time.

The House Judiciary Committee has the power and authority to demand a special counsel. The conundrum is not an easy one to overcome. Current law allows the U.S. Attorney General to appoint a special counsel. The thoroughly corrupt, Eric Holder, will never appoint one to investigate the putative president's deliberate release of a forged document. A forged document that allegedly reinforces his eligibility. The House Judiciary Committee could take the extraordinary step of going to the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC and demand a special counsel be appointed.

If Rep. Jones feels so strongly about impeachment, perhaps some of his constituents can educate him on why that cannot and will not happen and to support appointment of a special counsel. To not support such an appointment will speak volumes.

If the millions of Americans who are putting their efforts towards impeachment would flood the House Judiciary Committee with letters demanding a special counsel, it would raise the stakes to a new level. It would also make Barry's situation so untenable he "resigns" or his handlers force him to leave; we know how issues "grow legs". The question of why would Barry use a forged birth certificate raises the one legal issue for which he can be removed from the White House: his dual citizenship at birth, not where he was born. A special counsel would be forced to address that issue. It's called motive.

At this time we don't know what Sheriff Joe will do with his final investigation as far as a legal enforcement body. But, every member of the U.S. House of Representatives is up for reelection this November. Remind members of the Judiciary Committee and your incumbent that if they don't stand up for the U.S. Constitution now, look for a new job. Hit your incumbent at every town hall meeting, every fund raiser and any where else he/she appears. Republicans desperately want this to go away, but we the people can show them it isn't and we will not stop until Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama is brought to justice for his crimes.

Links:

1- The conundrum of removing Obama/Soetoro from office (5.11.2011)
2- Follow up on Quo Warranto as it relates to removing Obama/Soetoro (5.12.2011)
3- Why Obama cannot be impeached (7.14.2011)
4- Obama could be removed by his own signature (7.22.2011)

 

CORRUPTION

 

“FROM LIBYA TO SYRIA, WAR IS A RACKET, IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN”

April 16th, 2012 by

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30295

 

By James Corbett

War is a racket. It always has been.” These words are as true now as they were when Major General Smedley Butler first delivered them in a series of speeches in the 1930s. And he should have known. As one of the most decorated and celebrated marines in the history of the Corps, Butler drew on his own experiences around the globe to rail against the business interests that use the U.S. military as muscle men to protect their racket from perceived threats. From National City Bank interests in Haiti to United Fruit plantations in Honduras, from Standard Oil access to China to Brown Brothers operations in Nicaragua, Butler pointed out how intervention after intervention served the business interests of the well-connected even as American taxpayer money went to foot the bill for these adventures. The names and places may have changed, but the old adage holds: the more things change, the more they stay the same.

       
The National Transitional Council that is nominally in charge of what is left of Libya announced this week that they are beginning a probe of foreign oil contracts brokered during Gaddafi's reign by his son, Saif al-Islam. Libya is sitting on the largest oil reserves in Africa, and it is no coincidence that within weeks of the start of the NATO campaign last year the rebels had already secured the country's oil ports and refineries on the Gulf of Sidra and established their own national oil company for negotiating contracts with the invading forces. Although the oil contract probes are supposedly meant to show the transparency of the new “government” and their willingness to root out the graft and kickbacks inherent in the old regime, it's quietly acknowledged that the process will be used to reward the nations that most visibly supported last year's invasions and punish those who were more reticent.

       
Surprising, then, that the first companies on the block are Italy's Eni and France's Total. Both countries fostered close ties with the NTC last year and France was the first country to officially recognize them as the government of Libya. But now Libya's general prosecutor is reviewing documents related to these companies for possible financial irregularities. The SEC is getting in on the act, too, requesting documents relating to both companies' Libyan operations to check for suspected violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The potential blow to the European giants' share in the Libyan market is especially painful in light of the upcoming Iranian oil embargo that threatens to squeeze the crude imports of Greece, Italy and Spain. Now, as Libya ramps up oil production to pre-war levels the obvious potential winners in the probe are the American and British majors, who could end up eating up some of Eni and Total's share in Libya's oil production should the investigation lead to charges.

       
China may also have reason to be wary of their standing with the new government. Chinese-Libyan ties were increasingly close in the years leading up to Gaddafi's ouster, with trade volume having reached $6.6 billion in 2010. In 2007, as the US was beginning to put AFRICOM together and the competitive scramble for African resources was heating up, Gaddafi delivered an address to the students of Oxford University where he praised China's hands-off approach to investment in Africa. At the time, Gaddafi suggested that Beijing was winning the hearts and minds of Africans with its reluctance to interfere in local politics, while Washington was alienating the population with their heavy-handed interventions. In the wake of the NATO bombing the would-be government of Libya is singing a different tune and relations with China have cooled down. Last August a senior NTC official suggested that China would be punished when it came time to award reconstruction contracts in Libya because of their initial reluctance to support the rebels. Although the statement was downplayed, it was revealed earlier this month that Chinese companies are still waiting to begin negotiations on losses to frozen and outstanding contracts worth $18.8 billion. Relations are still cordial, though, and the Libyan government is assuring China that the contracting companies will be in a better position to resume negotiations after national elections in June.

       
These latest moves from Tripoli may be as much about projecting the idea that the NTC is actually functioning as a government than anything else, though. Armed militias are still waging violent turf wars throughout the country, with 26 people dying in fighting between rivals in the western town of Zwara earlier this month and 150 dying in skirmishes last month in the southern city of Sabha. One militia stormed a hotel in Tripoli and opened fire, then beat and kidnapped the manager after he told a militia member to pay an outstanding room bill. Last week hundreds marched in Benghazi to call for an end to the violence between the armed gangs. The country is deeply divided along tribal lines and armed militias still occupy government buildings and openly flaunt the pronouncements of the erstwhile government. The idea that the NTC is actually functioning as a government is a pipe dream at this point, but as long as they keep the oil pumping and the victors of last year's humanitarian love bombing get their spoils, there's hardly a peep out of Washington, Paris, or London. Smedley Butler would not be surprised.

       
Meanwhile in Syria, the racketeers' plans for a Libyan repeat are proceeding apace. Last week we reported on the so-called “Friends of Syria” and their agreement to begin openly funding the rebels to the tune of millions of dollars. This week we have been watching the inevitable, pre-scripted “break down” in Annan's UN-brokered ceasefire. Exactly on cue, unverified reports from unnamed activists have begun rolling in to the usual media mouthpieces via foreign-based NGOs proclaiming so many people have died in continued fighting. The unacknowledged elephant in the room, however, is that, exactly as Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has been attempting to point out all month, it's impossible to expect a cessation in fighting when you are openly arming, training and funding an insurgent proxy army that is hell-bent on toppling the government. However, Lavrov is banging his head against a brick wall. The ceasefire was never meant to be a ceasefire and it's all political theater at this point anyway. Any and every unverified rumor of fighting or violence in the country will now be taken as a sign that Assad has broken the agreement and the pressure to get Beijing and Moscow to acquiesce to the toppling of the Syrian government will intensify.

       
In the end, this will not be a carbon copy of Libya. There will be no NATO-led bombardment or large-scale military intervention, because Russia couldn't allow that to happen. Besides, Syria has Russian supplied surface-to-air missiles and no compunction about using them. Instead, political pressure will increase for Assad to step down and the funds and arms to the rent-a-rebel force will continue increasing until the government is toppled. The dangerous factor in this equation is that neither the west nor China/Russia have blinked yet and there is a significant amount of face to lose for one side or the other in this proxy struggle. The one with the most to lose is clearly Iran, which all things being equal would be a dominant power player in regional politics. All things, however, are not equal. With their oil increasingly embargoed, the sanctions getting progressively tighter, and one of their key allies in the region threatening to topple in favor of a hostile Sunni insurgency, Iran has to know that when and if the Syrian domino falls, it falls on them.

       
At the same time, attention is turning once again to another of the war racketeers' key interests: Pakistan. There has been newfound congressional interest in the so-called “Free Baluchistan” movement seeking independence for Pakistan's Baluchi nationals. Citing human rights violations, Rep. Rohrbacher (R-California) has introduced a resolution calling on Pakistan to recognize Balochi self-determination. He has even written an op-ed in the Washington Post where he begins his argument with recourse to human rights and switches seamlessly in the fourth paragraph into noting with evident glee the region's natural gas, gold, uranium, and copper reserves.     

Interestingly, Russia agreed last week to pony up $1.5 billion in financing and technical assistance for a proposed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. The projected course of the pipeline? It would start in Iran’s southern Assalouyeh Energy Zone and enter Pakistan from the west, crossing straight through Baluchistan. Coincidence, surely. The IP pipeline has had a tumultuous history, complete with plans to run the pipeline all the way to India (an idea from which India has distanced itself but never completely abandoned) and the potential involvement of China, which has flirted with the idea of incorporating the pipeline into a planned logistical network running from the port of Gwadar in Pakistan's southwest all the way to Xinjiang province. Now, with a proposal for Russian funding on the table the pipeline looks closer than ever to becoming a reality.

       
From the outset, the US has used every bit of leverage it has to get the parties involved to scrap the idea. Diplomatic pressure has been brought to bear on China, Pakistan, and India, with Beijing and New Delhi both appearing to buckle under the pressure and pull out of the project. The US has backed its own alternative pipeline, a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India route, but that idea is looking less feasible by the day. Iran has nearly completed its share of the proposed IP pipeline, but Pakistan has been hesitant. Now along come the racketeers to fund yet another rebel movement in another geostrategically vital corridor, and before you know it “Free Baluchistan” might derail the project altogether. Look for US pressure on the Pakistani government regarding Baluchistan to increase as the pipeline comes closer to completion.

       
Butler was right. War is a racket, after all. These days the muscle men are rent-a-mobs and insurgents more so than the U.S. military, but the idea is the same: fund, arm and train the fighters to secure the resources and control the strategic areas. In Libya the NATO-backed rebels wrested the oil spigot from the unpredictable Gaddafi. In Syria the “Friends of Syria” are overthrowing a key Iranian ally and taking over an important square on the geopolitical chessboard. In Pakistan, American-backed rebels may succeed in driving a wedge through a key Iran-Pakistan pipeline. And the racket continues. One would do well to remember the grand finale of Butler's speech: “To hell with war!”

In order to access the Corbett Report: http://www.corbettreport.com

 

WAR

 

 

 

It’s Official Barack Obama Has Declared Himself De-facto Dictator Of The United States Of America.

April 14th, 2012 by

By Floyd Brown

Western Center for Journalism

     He stopped trying to hide the fact that he believes that he's our king and dictator long ago. And now, it's even worse… some of his minions and supporters are no longer trying to hide the fact that THEY 

DE FACTO COUP

believe that Obama is our king and our dictator.

     They say a picture is worth a thousand words and the sick and repulsive "novelty item" to the right is now being flown by Obama's minions across the country. Even the see-no-evil-Obama-media has taken notice of people flying this desecration in various places across the country, including a Democratic Headquarters in Florida.

     The fact that people would desecrate the flag in such a manner should make you angry, but it's also a symptom of a deep sickness. You would have expected to see such a cultish display in Mao Tse Tung's China or in Soviet Russia… but never here… never in the good ol' USA.

     But it's flying here and that means that the cult of personality is alive and well in what used to pass for the United States of America. It can no longer be ignored. We are now being ruled by a tin-pot, de-facto dictator and it's about time that someone, other than Obama's minions who fly that desecration with pride in their hearts, has the courage to admit it.

     The Obama Regime is a full-grown malignancy… a horrendous disease afflicting this great nation; and the picture above proves it more than any words can ever express. And there is only one cure for what ails this great nation. The time for Congress to IMPEACH BARACK OBAMA is upon us. It is now!

He's Declared Congress Irrelevant. Now, He's About To Declare The Courts Irrelevant Too.

     For months, Barack Obama telegraphed that he would deem Congress irrelevant. No one believed it. When Obama adviser Josh Earnest, said working with Congress is "no longer a requirement," our elected officials simply dismissed the statement as a figure of speech.

     But Obama was as good as his word. When he clearly violated Article 2, Section 2 of the United States Constitution and decreed, without the advice and consent of the Senate, that Richard Cordray would be the head of his so-called Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, he made it official.

     Through this seemingly insignificant but illegal act of defiance, Barack Obama stopped sticking his toe in the water and finally took the plunge. He essentially declared himself dictator, and no one in Congress lifted a finger to stop his tyrannical usurpation of power! 

     And now, he's about to do the same to the Supreme Court and no one can say he didn't warn us. With totalitarian audacity and dictatorial arrogance, Barack Hussein Obama recently DARED the Justices of the United States Supreme Court to cross him and strike down his precious ObamaCare. From on high, he proclaimed that any ruling, not to his liking, would constitute "judicial activism."

     And in spite of the back-tracking from Eric Holder's Department of Injustice, Obama still managed to successfully telegraph his chilling and totalitarian message. It doesn't really matter what actually constitutes "judicial activism" because only Barack Obama defines "judicial activism" and what Barack Obama, defines as "judicial activism" will NOT BE TOLERATED. Essentially he's saying: Go ahead, rule against me; I'll simply declare you irrelevant and continue to implement ObamaCare anyway!

     The pundits will try to tell you that such a thing is not possible… that it can't happen. They're fools. What's to stop Barack Obama from declaring the Supreme Court irrelevant? What's to stop him from doing again what he has already done? He's violated the Constitution and usurped power on far too many occasions already and no one has stopped him.

     Why, after all that has already transpired, is it so hard for the politicians and pundits in Washington to get their heads around the concept that Barack Obama will YET AGAIN usurp authority he does not have and rule this nation as he pleases? He's already declared himself to be above the law… beyond the law. What's Congress going to do? Impeach him?

     Our answer? Hell yes! Our founders knew that such a thing could happen. They knew that a self-styled dictator could, one day, take control of the Executive Branch of the federal government, and they ratified Article 2, Section IV of the Constitution of the United States to safeguard our great nation against such an eventuality.

     The Obama Regime is a disease. Impeachment is the cure!

Enough Is Enough.

     How many times will Barack Obama violate his oath of office before conservative in Congress, say enough is enough? What will it take for our so-called conservative leaders to stop hiding behind their desks and do what must be done to save our country?

     Something must be done and you're not the only one saying it.

     When Obama commanded the United States Supreme Court not to strike down his precious (and unconstitutional) ObamaCare, Breitbart.tv wrote that Obama had "declared war on the Supreme Court" and Dan Collins with Conservativecommune.com wrote: "This thug needs to be impeached and thrown out of office for a seditious violation of the Constitution." And yet, no one in Congress has lifted a finger.

     Tony Katz, in TownHall.com, writes: "Obama’s pronouncement about the Supreme Court was so disingenuous and divisive as alone to warrant impeachment proceedings." And yet, no one in Congress has lifted a finger.

     Obama was caught in an open mic moment and actually told Russia's Dmitry Medvedev that he would have "more flexibility" after the November election to put our national security on the back burner, Katz called it a "stunning statement… worthy of a conversation about treason." And yet, no one in Congress has lifted a finger.

     The Obama Regime is telling the Catholic Church and other institutions of faith, in direct violation of the 1st Amendment, that they are now REQUIRED to pay for the birth control, sterilizations and abortions of others. And yet, no one in Congress has lifted a finger.

     And in spite of the constitutional requirement that the President of the United States enforce all the laws of the land, Barack Obama decreed that he would not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, and that he would not defend the Act in court. It was a clear violation of the Constitution. Peter LaBarbera with AFTAH rightly called it "another shocking act" by "the most arrogant and Constitution-abusing president in America’s history." And yet, no one in Congress has lifted a finger.

     It's time for our elected officials in Congress to understand what the American people already know. Our nation is under attack from within and the source of those attacks must be removed.

Tyranny Has Become A Pattern Of Behavior With The Obama Regime.

     Let's face facts; tyranny has become a pattern of behavior with Obama and he's no longer making an effort to even conceal his tyrannical abuses of power. Obama has essentially said… one too many times… I'll do as I please and I dare anyone to stop me.

     Ironically, a man who is probably not constitutionally eligible to hold the office in the first place has seized powers that go far beyond those that a legitimate President would wield.

     But Barack Obama is not a king or a monarch. He is not our dictator and when the man or woman occupying the Oval Office violates the Constitution, the remedy is IMPEACHMENT!

     There can be no other remedy. Obama has gone too far too many times. The Obama Regime has become bold as brass.

     And why shouldn't Obama and his apparatchiks be bold? At every turn our so-called Republican leaders in Congress have given him inches, and each time he has taken miles. When will these tyrannical abuses stop? How far will Barack Obama go? When will they draw a line in the sand and say: the tyranny stops today!

     History doesn't paint a pretty picture. Until patriotic Americans take action and lean on our elected representatives to expose Obama's dictatorial, illegal and unconstitutional behavior, the sky is the limit.

     But it's not too late. To those who may be saying that pushing for impeachment is "impractical" with an election less than year away, we respectfully ask: how much damage can Barack Obama do in one year? How much power can he tyrannically usurp in a year? How much damage can he do to this great country and our Constitution in a year?

     Pending elections DO NOT trump the Constitution and at this point, patriotic Americans should not be asking WHETHER Barack Obama should be impeached but rather, need to be asking WHEN will Barack Obama be impeached!

Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent and personalized Blast Faxes to the Leadership of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives.

BUTTON DELETED

If button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.


P.S. Even if you can not join us in this effort right now, you can still help us expose Barack Hussein Obama by sending this e-mail to at least 10 of your friends.

The  Western Center for Journalism is a 501©3 educational organization. Contributions are tax-deductible as allowed by IRS regulations. Personal and corporate contributions are allowed.

The Center for Western Journalism
42104 N Venture Drive Suite B-122, Anthem, AZ 85086  (202) 370-6366

 

DE FACTO COUP

 

 

Vote all you want The flight plan doesnt change

April 12th, 2012 by

 

http://ppjg.me/2012/04/12/vote-all-you-want-the-flight-plan-doesnt-change/

 

By Marti Oakley  Copyright 2012 All rights Reserved

 

 

Vote all you want, the flight plan does not change no matter who wins.  We got us a big election coming up and of course the country is dividing itself right down the middle at least in some areas. For most of us out here this coming election means nothing. The usual arguments over whether we are flying headlong into socialism or, if we are in fact in the throws of fascism seem to have lost their appeal. Most have realized that whether socialism or  fascism the end result is the same; a ruling class and the rest of us servants.  It just depends on which sales pitch appeals to you. For most of us, we have had it with the snake oil politicians and their ever changing sales pitch’s. over Fascism, the overtaking of government by corporations, is hidden behind euphoric,  glorious terms;  Free markets, free trade, globalism and the world economy.  Most who subscribe to this pitch appear to be fearful of being cut out of the action, maybe not getting a piece of the global pie or at least a piece as big as they thought they should get.  Socialism, the plan for the common people, will see many fall never to rise again.

In 2010, even many hard-core Republicans were relieved to see the end of the Bush/Cheney neo-cons and the unending assaults on freedom and our rights.  Eight years of what was, in my opinion, the most treacherous, murderous, pathologically evil cabal that had seized control of our country, was finally over.  What we were to find out was that it would only be continued under the new president, and taken so much further.

The election of Obama gave the country its first sense of hope after eight years of massive walls of lies, deceit, manipulation and some of the most corrupt individuals to ever find their way into our government.  We replaced the neo-cons with Obama/Biden.  We should have listened more closely to that victory speech, but we didn’t.  We were too relieved, too hopeful and far too enthralled with this new president and the promises made; promises we thought meant a return to liberty, to integrity and honor.  We should have listened more closely and not allowed our emotions to cloud our critical thinking.

Fundamentally changing

Obama asked in his acceptance speech if we were ready to join him in fundamentally changing our country.  What did we think he meant?  Did any one of us think to ask….fundamentally change it how?  No, we did not.  It would appear the fundamental changes Obama promised were comprised of restructuring state and local governments to accommodate the United Nations and one world government.  Along the way we [fundamentally changed] Libya, Egypt, parts of Pakistan and are now looking towards fundamentally changing Iran and a few other places where the global bankers had been unable to sink their parasitic claws into, and the global oil cartels had not been able to rob and plunder the oil fields.  Obama has simply picked up the one world government mantra and moved forward at great speed deconstructing the United States

We are watching in horror the fundamental changing not only here at home but around the world as the one world government begins to be assembled.

The Flight plan

The plan has been for many decades to totally deconstruct the sovereign United States, reducing us to third world status so that no matter how hard we have worked in the past, or how hard we work in the future we will never regain our former stature.  We will never be as free or empowered as a population as we once were.

The coming presidential election means nothing.  Mit Romney, who does not stand a remote chance of even coming anywhere close to winning the election has now been assured the Republican nomination.  This only affirms what I have said in the past: No one wants Obama re-elected more than the GOP does.

Our economy is virtually dissolving before our eyes.  We have 25 million legal American workers out of work with more American jobs leaving the country by the thousands each and every month, never to return.  The whole structure is going to collapse under the weight of ever-increasing and senseless federal spending and we are faced with a debt so massive, so incomprehensible, that it can never be paid off.  The last thing the GOP and Republicans want is for the impending total collapse to be steered by a Republican president.

Obama must be re-elected.

What better way to make sure Obama is re-elected than to run what possibly is the most lack-luster, uninspiring, unpopular candidate possible?  The really frightening part of this is that with the exception of Ron Paul, the other candidates that came and went; Gingrich, Santorum, Trump, to name a few, were bordering on lunacy or gross immorality.  And these were the best the GOP could come up with?  And they want to win the presidential election?  Really?  Then why didn’t they support Ron Paul?

As it is, we can only look forward to more of the same.  Even if Romney stood a snowball’s chance in hell of getting elected, not one of the egregious assaults on the constitution, the expanded power grabbing by the federal government, the construction of unconstitutional councils, czars offices, or even the unlawful expansion of federally owned sub-corporations like the EPA, USDA, FDA, will be reversed.  The deconstruction of the Republic of the United States will continue as if we never voted at all.  Romney would not correct even one thing.  If he would or could, he would never get the nomination.

So vote all you want, not one thing will change. Not one job will be saved, not one Wall Street crook will go to jail, not one corrupt banker or politician will ever face charges.  While you are busy punching those buttons congress will still be busy with insider trading and Dempsey and Panetta will be dining with their new masters at the United Nations.   Agenda 21 mandates will continue to be implemented in your state and city and eventually your right to own property, unfettered by federal interference and UN edicts, will have disappeared.

We do not elect presidents: We elect the Chief Executive of the corporation known as “the United States, a.k.a. The USA” and this corporation is not bound by our Constitution and does not believe we should or do have any inalienable rights.  We are being controlled by a hostile foreign government.

As one very great lady said:

“If voting could change anything, they would make it illegal”.

 

 

 

 

 

This is how a brokered convention works

April 10th, 2012 by

contact: becworks@gmail.com

Reporting.
R.E. Sutherland, M.Ed./sciences
Freelance Investigative Science Reporter   

NOTE:  the GOP took your money to run fake campaigns and they knew all along that it would go to a brokered convention…that is how the game is played in the GOP…TOTAL CONTROL.  Those of us who have studied this monster from inside the political field understand how it works.  Money is king.  Vote counters control the winners.  Let me be absolutely clear…every candidate running today in the GOP is destined to be a loser….and they have agreed…for a price…to play the game as it is dictated from the national level of the GOP…which will never admit to any of it.  After the 2012 elections, watch who is appointed to what for the details.

FACT:  You can continue to use "basket ball rules" on the "political football field"…or you can learn the real rules.  Choose….either CONTROL or BE CONTROLLED.  By the way…NO, you are not "free"…. but, you don't have to be stupid.

READ the definition of a Brokered Convention, and then read the recent article about the most unfavored candidate in the GOP race.  He refused to play their game, and he is totally ignored by the media, because they are forcing him out of their game.  He is playing by the basketball rules…and he is losing….will you?              

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
QUOTES:  Definition of "brokered convention" and an ARTICLE

DEFINITION

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A brokered convention is a situation in United States politics in which there are not enough delegates 'won' during the presidential primary and caucus elections for a single candidate to have a pre-existing majority, during the first official vote for a political party's presidential candidate at its nominating convention.

Once the first ballot, or vote, has occurred, and no candidate has a majority of the delegates' votes, the convention is then considered brokered; thereafter, the nomination is decided through a process of alternating political horse-trading, and additional re-votes.[1][2][3][4] In this circumstance, all regular delegates (who, previously, were pledged to the candidate who had won their respective state's primary or caucus election) are "released," and are able to switch their allegiance to a different candidate before the next round of balloting. It is hoped that this 'freedom' will result in a re-vote resulting in a clear majority of delegates for one candidate.

Superdelegate votes are counted on the first ballot. Although the term "brokered convention" is sometimes used to refer to a convention where the outcome is decided by superdelegate votes rather than pledged delegates alone, this is not the original sense of the term. Like a brokered convention, the potentially decisive role played by superdelegates can often go against the popular vote from the primaries and caucuses.

Contents

 [hide

[edit] Brokered conventions

Before the era of presidential primary elections, political party conventions were routinely brokered. The Democratic Party required two-thirds of delegates to choose a candidate, starting with the first Democratic National Convention in 1832, and then at every convention from 1844 until 1936. This made it far more likely to have a brokered convention, particularly when two strong factions existed. The most infamous example was at the 1924 Democratic National Convention (the Klanbake), where the divisions between Wets and Drys on Prohibition (and other issues) led to 102 ballots of deadlock between frontrunners Alfred E. Smith and William G. McAdoo before dark horse John W. Davis was chosen as a compromise candidate on the 103rd ballot. Adlai Stevenson (of the 1952 Democratic Party) and Thomas Dewey (of the 1948 Republican Party) were the most recent "brokered convention" presidential nominees. The last winning U.S. presidential nominee produced by a brokered convention was Franklin D. Roosevelt, in 1932.

[edit] Conventions which were close to being brokered

Since 1952, there have been many years when brokered conventions were projected but did not come to pass:

  • The Democratic Party's 1968 convention might have been brokered. Robert F. Kennedy won most of the primaries held before his assassination, though at the time not enough delegates were selected by primaries to determine the presidential nominee. President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had decided against running for a second term, still controlled most of the party machinery and did use it in support of Vice President Hubert Humphrey, who did not contest the primaries. Had Kennedy not been assassinated, that would have meant that the convention may have been divided between him and Humphrey's supporters.
  • In 1976, the Republican primaries gave President Gerald Ford a slight lead in the popular vote and delegates entering the Republican National Convention but not enough delegates to secure the nomination. A brokered convention was predicted but Ford managed to receive the necessary support on the first ballot to edge Ronald Reagan. This is the last time a Republican presidential convention opened without the nominee having already been decided in the primaries.[5]
  • In 1980, Senator Ted Kennedy, challenging incumbent President Jimmy Carter for the Democratic nomination, fell short in the primaries, but was still angling for delegates to switch over to him when he arrived at the Democratic convention in August. It was to no avail: Carter won handily on the first ballot, and Kennedy finally dropped out of the running a few hours later.
  • In 1984, as a result of the Democratic primaries, former Vice President Walter Mondale was the clear frontrunner though he remained 40 delegates short of clinching the nomination. This had to be formalized at the convention, being the last time that any presidential convention opened without the nominee having already been decided in the primaries. However, a convention fight was unlikely as rival Gary Hart was lobbying for the Vice Presidential slot on the ticket, being resigned to the likely possibility that Mondale would receive the nomination. Mondale indeed received the overwhelming support of superdelegates on the first ballot to become the Democratic presidential candidate.[6]
  • In 1988, a brokered convention was predicted for the Democrats. There was initially no clear frontrunner since Gary Hart had withdrawn. Also, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, and Jesse Jackson each won multiple primaries on Super Tuesday.[7] Dukakis was named the frontrunner by the media, as he drew support from all sections of the nation while other candidates' support was largely limited to their native regions, so he maintained the momentum to secure the nomination in the next round of primaries.

[edit] 2008 presidential election

For the 2008 election there had been speculation that the Democratic Party's national convention might be brokered, or at least that the convention might commence without a presumptive nominee.[8]

For the Democrats a brokered convention was considered possible, as it was unclear for a time whether either of the two frontrunners, Senator Barack Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton, would be able to win a majority of pledged delegates before the convention. The only other candidate with pledged delegates was John Edwards, with 0.5% of the delegates.

The provisos given above do not consider the fact that Michigan and Florida's delegates were originally excluded, since they held their primaries too early in violation of party rules. However, through a compromise by the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee, Michigan and Florida delegates were seated and receive 0.5 votes per delegate. Clinton's Michigan campaign chair James Blanchard, argued that both states should have their full delegate slates restored; David Bonior who was now on Obama's team pointed out that these primaries were not proper contests – Clinton was the only presidential nominee that campaigned and therefore won most of the popular vote in these states – and that the DNC compromise was a concession on their part.

While falling behind Obama in the popular vote and delegates won through primaries and caucuses, Clinton initially enjoyed a large lead in superdelegates and maintained that they believed that she was the stronger candidate in the general election. Nonetheless, Obama criticized Clinton's rationale saying that the superdelegates' decisive role could be seen as undemocratic if it went against the popular vote. During the last week of primaries, DNC Chairman Howard Dean was also pressuring undecided superdelegates to commit to either remaining presidential candidate, in order to avert the potentially divisive contest carrying on in the summer. Clinton opposed Dean's initiative, because she planned to continue all the way to the convention where the undecided superdelegates would be her last chance to get the nomination, knowing that she could not overtake Obama's lead in the remaining primaries. With Obama taking North Carolina by double digits and almost winning the crucial blue-collar state of Indiana on Super Tuesday III, ensuring him the majority of delegates and popular vote from the primaries, more and more superdelegates began committing to him leading up to the June 3 contests. As a result, on June 3, Obama was declared the presumptive nominee that evening, with pledged delegates from Montana and South Dakota. Clinton conceded on June 7, urging her supporters to support Obama in the general election, and so no brokered convention resulted for the Democrats in 2008.

For the Republicans, a brokered convention was also forecast because of the number of strong candidates and their different geographic bases. The number of "winner take all" states benefits candidates with strong regional support. In addition, the weakened power of President Bush to force candidates out of the race results in fewer levels of influence for them.[9][10] With John McCain winning the majority of delegates on Super Tuesday and the subsequent withdrawal of his strongest challenger, Mitt Romney, the brokered convention was averted.

[edit] Brokered conventions today

Several factors encourage a clear and timely decision in the primary process.

First, candidates tend to get momentum as they go through the process because of the bandwagon effect. Thus, one or two candidates will be portrayed by the media to voters as the front runner(s) as a result of their placement in the first primaries and caucuses, and as also-ran candidates drop out, their supporters will tend to vote for the leaders.[11] Theorists have identified two types of political momentum, piecemeal and all-at-once, with different impacts on front-runners and those right behind them.[12]

Secondly, political parties wish to avoid the negative publicity from a brokered convention as well as to maximize the amount of time the nominee has to campaign for the presidency itself (there are barely two months between the major parties' conventions and Election Day).

Especially on account of the desire to foster party unity in the months leading up to Election Day, it is considered possible if not probable that any "brokering" that may be required for a future presidential convention will actually take place in the weeks and months leading up to the convention, once it becomes clear that no candidate will likely secure a majority of delegates without an agreement with one or more rivals. Such an agreement would likely commit the front runner to make some form of concession(s) in return, such as selecting the former rival as his/her vice presidential nominee.

[edit] Brokered conventions in popular culture

The movie The Best Man depicts the brokered convention of an unnamed political party, with two candidates vying for the support of a previous President.

In the last two episodes of season six of The West Wing, the Democratic party fought through a brokered convention, with dark horse candidate Matthew Santos (Jimmy Smits) eventually prevailing.

In the Hold Me in Paradise episode of Boardwalk Empire, "Nucky" Thompson is the de facto leader of the New Jersey Republican delegation during the 1920 Presidential Election held in Chicago. In the episode, Nucky commits his delegation to Warren G. Harding in exchange for an unfavorable outcome for an instate rival.

[edit] References

1.     ^ Paul, Katie (2008-02-07). "Convention Wisdom". Newsweek.

2.     ^ Eun Kyung Kim (2008-02-10). "Convention Q & A". Gannett News Service (Detroit Free Press).

3.     ^ Clift, Eleanor (2008-02-06). "A Ticking Clock". Newsweek.

4.     ^ Gold, Jeffrey (2008-02-09). "Post-primary questions answered". Associated Press (Courier-Post).

5.     ^ Madonna, G. Terry (2007-12-06). "What If the Conventions Are Contested?". RealClearPolitics.

6.     ^ Bai, Matt (2008-02-03). "Back-Room Choices". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-04-27.

7.     ^ "Late Primary Keeps State Role Intact". States News Service (The New York Times). 1988-03-20.

8.     ^ "A Brokered Convention" (video). 60 Minutes (Yahoo! News). 2008-02-08.

9.     ^ Freddoso, David (2007-12-10). "Convention Wisdom". National Review.

10.                        ^ Baker, Peter (2008-01-15). "A Brokered Convention? Consider the Possibilities". The Trail (The Washington Post).

11.                        ^ Kornacki, Steve (2007-12-20). "About That Brokered Convention…". The New York Observer.

12.                        ^ Cost, Jay (2007-12-30). "The Iowa Fallout: A Primer on Momentum, Part 2". RealClearPolitics.

ARTICLE

 

Ron Paul Is Being Cheated Out of the Republican Nomination

The GOP establishment has resorted to vote fraud in almost every state

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Despite his runaway success in terms of straw poll victories, campaign contributions and grass roots energy, a plethora of evidence strongly indicates that Ron Paul is being cheated out of winning any of the Republican caucuses, with the GOP establishment desperate to prevent the Texan Congressman from building any kind of momentum that the likes of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have been afforded.

 

Even the establishment media is now being forced to report that “Ron Paul Might Have Won Maine,” with evidence of potential vote fraud targeted against Ron Paul prompting the state’s GOP chairman Charles Webster to ask for a recount.

With just 84 per cent of the votes being counted, and with many towns and counties showing strong support for Ron Paul having not yet cast their votes, the media along with the Republican establishment brazenly declared Mitt Romney to be the winner, despite him having just a 194 vote lead over Ron Paul.

Erroneous reports of a snowstorm were cited as a pretext to cancel the caucus in Washington County, an area heavily dominated by Paul supporters, delaying the vote for a week. Voters in the county are still waiting to cast their ballots.

“That’s right. A prediction of 3-4 inches–that turned into nothing more than a dusting–was enough for a local GOP official to postpone the caucuses just so the results wouldn’t be reported tonight,” spokesman Gary Howard wrote in an E-mail to supporters, adding that even the local Girl Scouts’ meeting survived the weather.

Local reporters in Maine also revealed how the vote for most Waldo County towns was entered as “0”, as if no one had turned out to vote.

Rachel Maddow expanded on the reports in a feature on MSNBC, pointing out that when one town in Waldo attempted to call in its results, State officials said they already had results from the town showing Romney had won, when in reality that wasn’t the case and in fact Ron Paul had won.

The controversy in Maine follows the admitted mistake in Iowa where Mitt Romney was announced as the winner and yet a later recount found that Rick Santorum had actually beaten him. The kind of momentum Santorum was allowed to build as a result of that revision is unlikely to be afforded to Ron Paul in Maine.

The vote in Iowa was labeled by one observer as the “biggest fraud since Kennedy stole the West Virginia Primary”.

Before the vote took place, in a state where pre-primary polling showed Ron Paul in with a good chance of taking top spot, Republican strategist Dee Dee Benkie told a radio show that GOP insiders had resolved to prevent Ron Paul from winning the primary.

“They’re not going to want him to get number one, it’s very bad for Iowa, it’s terrible,” said Benkie, confirming the host’s claim that Iowa District Chairmen are organizing voting blocks to sabotage Paul’s chances by offering them sweetheart deals in return for voting against Paul.

After votes were counted at a secret undisclosed location, it was announced that Ron Paul, despite pre-primary polls showing the Congressman was in with a good chance of winning, had finished third.

The debacle in Nevada also clearly indicates that Ron Paul was cheated out of victory in the SIlver State. Despite results from every other state primary showing Ron Paul at least doubling his vote tally compared to 2008, for example climbing from 16,000 to 78,000 votes in South Carolina, In Nevada Paul received just a few hundred more votes than he achieved in 2008, leaving him with a third placed finish.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  •  

“Ron Paul who took second in Nevada in 2008 with 6,087 votes, only increased his support by 1.4% to just 6,175 in the 2012 results, despite all of the excitement, all the money spent, which was a lot more,” reports Money Trends Research. “In fact, the Paul campaign had brochures and volunteers almost knock on every door in Nevada this time around. Nevada is also very fertile ground for a candidate like Ron Paul, many people in Nevada just want to be left alone by the government, Ron Paul opposes taxing tips, seeing that they are not really income, but gifts, you would think this would go over real well in Las Vegas.”

As we documented before the Nevada primary, Paul’s campaign, after having finished second in the state behind Mitt Romney in 2008, poured huge amounts of energy and funding into the 2012 race, whereas Romney hardly had any ground campaign at all, and yet Romney ended up taking the state by a landslide.

Massive evidence of vote fraud subsequently emerged. News networks had announced Romney as the landslide winner before votes from Clark County – the largest county in Nevada representing more than 60 percent of the state’s voters – had even been counted. When CNN aired live footage of the votes being counted from one of the caucuses in Clark County, it was clear that Ron Paul had handily defeated Romney, and this in a “precinct full of Jewish and extremely Christian voters, two of Ron Paul’s worst demographics.”

“For five minutes, CNN sat in silence as the Republican precinct captain shouted out each vote while dozens of tabulators sat nearby keeping track,” wrote Mark Wachtler. Unfolding one sheet at a time, the man yelled, “Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul.”

The final tally showed that Ron Paul had defeated Romney by 183 to 45, in a precinct dominated by a demographic that wouldn’t even be expected to support Paul. Extrapolating this result statewide would have given Paul a clear victory, and yet Mitt Romney’s “landslide” victory vote figure barely changed throughout the whole night of ballot counting and was confirmed after a “private” vote count by the GOP establishment.

“Many had watched the results being tabulated live on national TV just as this author had,” writes Wachtler. “We all saw Ron Paul’s overwhelming victory in that part of Clark County. It’s unimaginable to believe that in the same county, a candidate could win overwhelmingly when the votes were counted live on TV, but lose so badly when the votes were counted by the Party establishment behind closed doors.”

This compendium of evidence, and the information presented above is merely scratching the surface, illustrates the fact that Ron Paul’s failure to win any of the primaries despite his massive financial backing and grass roots support, is almost certainly a result of vote fraud on behalf of the GOP establishment, which has conspired in almost every state to cheat Ron Paul out of building the kind of momentum that would have provided him the opportunity to challenge Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination.

Watch the clips below in which Alex Jones summarizes the case for vote fraud being used to target Ron Paul.

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

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.

 

Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com

 

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-is-being-cheated-out-of-the-republican-nomination

 

CORRUPTION

 

 

 


 

Israeli Connection to 911

April 3rd, 2012 by

 

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2012/04/03/truth-behind-911

-will-annihilate-israelvideo/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=

email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

 

TREASON

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“I have had long conversations over the past two weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at the Headquarters Marine Corps, and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that it is 100 percent certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period,” Alan Sabrosky, writer and consultant specializing in national and international security affairs, said in a clip appearing on the public video-sharing website You Tube.

Sabrosky said his colleagues who are still serving in uniform initially react with incredulity to his assertions but upon his explanations regarding the controlled demolition of the buildings their disbelief gives way to rage.

“First is disbelief, and what I show them immediately afterwards is an interview with a Danish demolitions expert named Danny Jowenko, and it shows the third building at the World Trade Center going down – WTC7.”

“The thing that’s necessary is to tell people: three buildings went down; the third was not hit by a plane, it was wired for controlled demolition, therefore, all of them were wired for controlled demolition. And at that point the reaction is rage. First disbelief, and then rage,” he added.

Sabrosky said if the Americans were apprised of the truth behind the attacks, they would not hesitate to eliminate Israel without any consideration for the costs involved.

“If Americans ever know that Israel did this, they are going to scrub them off the earth,” he said.

On September 11, 2001, a series of coordinated attacks were carried out in theUnited States, reportedly leaving nearly 3,000 people dead.

The US government claimed that 19 terrorists, allegedly affiliated with the shadowy,Afghanistan-based al-Qaeda group, had hijacked four commercial passenger jet airliners to carry out the attacks.

The official US account of the September 11 events has, however, been widely challenged by various quarters in the US and worldwide.

The US, under the administration of former President Bush, invaded Afghanistan in 2001 after claiming that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by the members of al-Qaeda harbored by the then Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

The US also attacked Iraq in 2003, insisting that the oil-rich country was in possession of weapons of mass destruction(WMD).

In his September 22, 2011 address to the UN General Assembly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for an independent international probe into the 9/11 incident, saying the attacks provided the US with a convenient excuse to wage wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“The Zionists are playing this as truly an all-or-nothing exercise, because if they lose this one, if the American people ever realize what happened, they’re done,” Sabrosky concluded.

NOTE:

Click the link at the top of the page for the video.

 

TREASON

 

 

How much is the U S dollar worth?

April 2nd, 2012 by

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/45581

By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh

Let the influx of money be ever so great, if there be no confidence, property will sink in value…The circulation of confidence is better than the circulation of money.” —James Madison, Speech, Virginia Convention, June 20, 1788

According to data from the University of Illinois professors Lawrence H. Officer and Samuel H. Williamson, the value of the dollar had depreciated so much by 2008 that it took $5.31 to buy what it cost $1 in 1971 when Nixon decided that the dollar would no longer be backed by gold. Until then, $35 could buy a troy ounce of gold every day. Our dollar today is worth less than 19 cents when compared to 1971 and the price of gold fluctuates between $1,500-1,700 per ounce.

Between February 2002 and December 2004, the value of the dollar dropped against the euro by 40 percent, a significant decline that was largely ignored by the media. (William J. Baumol and Alan S. Blinder)

The U.S. dollar has continued its decline in spite of the rosy economic picture presented by the MSM in the last four years.

Members of Congress cannot claim ignorance about the declining trend of the U.S. dollar because Craig K. Elwell, a specialist in Macroeconomic Policy, wrote a report on February 23, 2012 for the Congressional Research Service, “The Depreciating Dollar: Economic Effects and Policy Response.”

Any currency, including the dollar, is affected by demand from foreign governments, foreign nationals, or foreign corporations who wish to purchase goods, services, and assets from the country that issues the currency.

In order to buy our stocks, bonds, real estate, goods, and services, foreigners must first buy our currency, thus creating a demand for it.

The supply of dollars comes from the Federal Reserve System (the Fed) who prints money or issues electronic credit to its member banks. Transactions are made directly in cash or electronically in the form of debit and credit through the bank of the buyer and seller of currency.

If we have a large trade deficit with other nations, and we do because we usually import more goods than we do export, the value of the dollar decreases. The dollar decreases in value as a direct response to the “net increase in the supply of dollars on the foreign exchange markets.” (Craig K. Elwell)

A net increase in the demand for dollars on foreign exchange markets can increase the value of the dollar.

According to Craig K. Elwell, in 2007, “at the peak of the last economic expansion, the U.S. capital account recorded $1.5 trillion in purchases of foreign assets by U.S. residents (representing a capital outflow) and $2.1 trillion in purchases of U.S. assets by foreign residents (representing a capital inflow).”

Congress cannot affect exchange rates directly, but the value of the dollar “can be affected by decisions made on policy issues facing the 112th Congress, including decisions related to generating jobs, raising the debt limit, reducing the budget deficit, and stabilizing the growth of the federal government’s long-term debt.” (Craig K. Elwell)

In other words, stop regulating the remaining U.S. industry to death while destroying small businesses that create jobs. Stop the non-existent man-made global warming nonsense. Everyone knows that politicians want power; it is not about the environment. Stop catering to the United Nations third world dictatorships. Stop wasting taxpayers’ dollars on solar panel black holes, invest in natural gas, clean coal, nuclear, and fossil fuel generated energy.  Stop the non-existent green job creation lie, the Tesla “brick,” and the GM Volt electric car that nobody wants to buy. We want mobility. Stop sending our jobs overseas. Stop building corporate headquarters and entire industrial cities in China or India with U.S. dollars. Stop spending money we do not have. Stop borrowing money from China in order to spend it on wars, welfare, policing the planet, and supporting third world dictatorships who wish us harm. We are not Don Quixote de la Mancha “tilting at windmills,” attacking an imaginary enemy. We want to build a successful future, not the pipe dream of progressives.

Investors look for countries with a stable government, a high rate of return, good economic growth, and low inflation rates to park their excess capital. During the period of 1994-2003, U.S. had an expected rate of return of 8.6 percent (International Monetary Fund).

Current low interest rates in the U.S., kept so by Fed policy, give the U.S. no interest rate advantage over other developed countries. It is thus in the better interest of investors to move their capital to emerging economies, putting a further strain on the U.S. dollar.

If the dollar was expected to depreciate further due to a weak economy and out-of-control government spending, dollar assets would not be attractive to investors, they would seek new ways to diversify. By doing so, the value of the dollar would be eroded even more. “Diversifying to other currencies would be troublesome for the $11 trillion in U.S. securities held by foreigners.” (Craig K. Elwell)

The dollar is currently holding on because U.S. has a high degree of liquidity (securities can be turned quickly into cash with a daily turnover of $588 billion) and a variety of assets such as the bond market ($32 trillion total, $11 trillion government bonds).

Although the United States has been a safe bet in the past for foreign investors, as the largest debtor in the world, the federal government is now a default risk because of its lavish spending, which can downgrade Treasury securities and thus weaken the dollar.

Long-term assets are no longer seen as safe in the U.S. The dollar dropped 17 percent in value during 2009-2011. The European Union debt crisis in 2011-2012 with the potential default of Greece, its two bailouts, Italy’s bailout, Spain and Ireland, and the austerity measures demanded by Germany and France, gave the U.S. dollar a boost in value of 5 percent.

Central bank holdings are propping the U.S. dollar for the time being, in particular China with $3.2 trillion in exchange reserves, and Japan with $1.3 trillion.

The rising inflation rate in this country is depreciating the dollar as well. The purchasing power of the dollar is falling. All you have to do is take a trip to Italy. Prices are 44 percent higher not necessarily because of higher manufacturing costs, but simply because the exchange rate of the dollar against the euro is so weak.

A depreciated dollar will indirectly cause interest rates to go up. Current Federal Reserve policy is to keep interest rates low as a “monetary stimulus.” Despite low interest rates, demand for loans by small businesses and households is low because so many people are unemployed and businesses do not wish to expand in an economy burdened by expensive regulations and the specter of Obamacare liabilities. The Fed policy cannot successfully control both exchange rates and interest rates.

“The IMF study estimated that if the dollar had remained at its peak of early 2002, by the end of 2007, the price of gold would have been $250 per ounce lower, the price of a barrel of crude oil would have been $25 a barrel lower, and nonfuel commodity prices would have been 12 percent lower.” (Craig K. Elwell)

When the President says that nothing that we do can affect the price of oil, even if we drill everywhere, he is disingenuous. We can start by repealing the unfortunately named Affordable Healthcare Act that is bankrupting the country. We can drill on our own soil. We can implement logical and sane energy policies that restore the health of the U.S. economy and foreign investors’ trust in our government. The dollar is still the world’s “reserve currency.” China and Russia are trying to replace the dollar with another currency as trust in our government’s fiscal responsibility is waning.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Just maybe, after it’s too late, some of you will believe this is a planned depreciation of the dollar to remove it as a reserve currency and transfer economic leadership to china’s currency. Or, just a step in the process of a global currency from the BIS

GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION

UN Backed Scientists Call For Mega City Population Lockup

March 30th, 2012 by

 

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2012/03/30/un-backed-scientists-

call-for-mega-city-population-lockup/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_

medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

Posted by truther

 

In a recent statement put out by “Planet Under Pressure” several scientists call for denser cities in order to mitigate worldwide population growth. When in doubt that UN’s Agenda 21 is not the Mein Kampf of our day, one should consider yet another in-your-face confession from yet another certified biocratic control freak

According to an MSNBC article one of the scientists while speaking about human populations worldwide, stated:

“We certainly don’t want them strolling about the entire countryside. We want them to save land for nature by living closely [together].”

 

Insisting the world’s population be locked up within the confounds of mega-cities, the elite realizes that if the herd is to be properly controlled walls are needed- thick walls, and by constructing these walls, making the masses go this or that way will be made easier..

Chief scientist Michail Fragkias involved with “Planet under Pressure” told MSNBC that “the answer (to population growth) is denser cities.”

The conference, co-sponsored by NASA and UNEP by the way, released its statement calling for denser cities to mitigate “worldwide population growth” ahead of the Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development taking place in June of this year.

“If cities can develop in height rather than in width that would be much more preferable and environmentally not as harmful”, Fragkias said.

People who know anything about history know that the creation of mega-cities in which the masses may be rounded up and enclosed, is identical to the Nazi principle of the “ghetto” as a means of managing the masses. Every student of history may also know what happens to those masses shortly after.

Some of the organizers of “Planet under Pressure” are founding their plea on the notion that we (as humanity) have entered the “Anthropocene”: a new geological era in which humans- not natural conditions- are the main drivers of geological and meteorological processes. Citing a website devoted to this concept, Martin Rees of the Royal Society stated at the conference:

“This century is special in the Earth’s history. It is the first when one species — ours — has the planet’s future in its hands,” reports the AFP news agency. “We’ve invented a new geological era: the Anthropocene.”, he stated.

This echoes yet another scientist, a professor at the University of Colorado, who in recent times also mentioned this new era in relation to a call for population control when he stated:

“Scientists now speak of humanity’s increased demands and impacts on the globe as ushering in a new geological epoch: the Anthropocene. Such selfish and destructive appropriation of the resources of the Earth can only be described as interspecies genocide.”

In addition, the professor said: “Ending human population growth is almost certainly a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for preventing catastrophic global climate change. Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers (emphasis added) may be necessary in order to do so.”

The call for compact cities, filled to the brim with humans, is part of the UN’s depopulation agenda for sure. Within these proposed mega-cities, humans will be allowed to use RFID technology so they can be kept in check. The rest of the world, the “countryside” as one of the scientists told MSNBC, is reserved for the elite.

 

Totalitarianism

 

 

Barack Obama: I Have A Moral Obligation To Neuter America!

March 29th, 2012 by

 

http://frontporchpolitics.com/2012/03/barack-obama-i-have-a-moral-obligation-to-neuter-america/

Author Unknown

Barack Obama actually plans to do it. He actually plans to neuter America by unilaterally dismantling most of the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal. In fact, Barack Obama says that the United States has a “moral obligation” to disarm as we lead the way to “a world without nuclear weapons”. Sadly, a “world without nuclear weapons” is a fantasy that will not be possible any time soon. Nuclear weapons technology is getting into more hands with each passing year, and geopolitical tensions are rising all over the globe. If the United States did not have nuclear weapons, anyone with just a handful of nukes would constitute a massive threat to our national security. An overwhelming strategic nuclear arsenal helps keep us safe because every other nation on the planet knows that it would be national suicide to attack us. If you take that overwhelming strategic nuclear arsenal away, the entire calculation changes.

Many out there claim that even if the U.S. only has a few hundred nuclear warheads that it will be more than enough to be an effective deterrent. Sadly, that simply is not true.

If an enemy knows that we only have a few hundred warheads, and if they know exactly where those warheads are located for verification purposes, then a first strike which would take out the vast majority of our operational warheads becomes very plausible.

That is why what Obama wants to do is so incredibly dangerous. If he reduces our strategic nuclear arsenal down to almost nothing, the odds of a nuclear first strike against the United States someday will go up dramatically.

The following is what Fox News reported that Obama said during a speech in South Korea the other day….

“American leadership has been essential to progress in a second area — taking concrete steps towards a world without nuclear weapons,” Obama said yesterday during a speech in Korea. “I believe the United States has a unique responsibility to act — indeed, we have a moral obligation.”

A moral obligation to do what? A moral obligation to neuter America? Obama also said the following in South Korea during his speech the other day….

“Even as we have more work to do, we can already say with confidence that we have more nuclear weapons than we need.”

 

iNSANITY

 

POLICE STATE USA New Obama Executive Order Seizes U S Infrastructure and Citizens for Military Preparedness

March 22nd, 2012 by

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29835

 

By Brandon Turbeville

In a stunning move, on March 16, 2012, Barack Obama signed an Executive Order stating that the President and his specifically designated Secretaries now have the authority to commandeer all domestic U.S. resources including food and water. The EO also states that the President and his Secretaries have the authority to seize all transportation, energy, and infrastructure inside the United States as well as forcibly induct/draft American citizens into the military. The EO also contains a vague reference in regards to harnessing American citizens to fulfill “labor requirements” for the purposes of national defense.

Not only that, but the authority claimed inside the EO does not only apply to National Emergencies and times of war. It also applies in peacetime.

The National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order exploits the “authority” granted to the President in the Defense Production Act of 1950 in order to assert that virtually every means of human survival is now available for confiscation and control by the President via his and his Secretaries’ whim.

The unconstitutionality of the overwhelming majority of Executive Orders is well established, as well as the illegality of denying citizens their basic Constitutional and human rights, even in the event of a legitimate national emergency. Likewise, it should also be pointed out that, like Obama’s recent Libyan adventure and the foregone conclusion of a Syrian intervention, there is no mention of Congress beyond a minor role of keeping the allegedly co-equal branch of government informed on contextually meaningless developments.

As was mentioned above, the scope of the EO is virtually all-encompassing. For instance, in “Section 201 – Priorities and Allocations Authorities,” the EO explains that the authority for the actions described in the opening paragraph rests with the President but is now delegated to the various Secretaries of the U.S. Federal Government. The list of delegations and the responsibility of the Secretaries as provided in this section are as follows:

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

One need only to read the “Definitions” section of the EO in order to clearly see that terms such as “food resources” is an umbrella that includes literally every form of food and food-related product that could in any way be beneficial to human survival.

That being said, “Section 601 – Secretary of Labor” delegates special responsibilities to the Secretary of Labor as it involves not just materials citizens will need for survival, but the actual citizens themselves.

Obviously, the ability of the U.S. government to induct and draft citizens into the military against their will is, although a clear violation of their rights, not an issue considered shocking by its nature of having been invoked so many times in the past. Logically, this “authority” is provided for in this section.

However, what may be shocking is the fact that Section 601 also provides for the mobilization of “labor” for purposes of the national defense.  Although some subsections read that evaluations are to be made regarding the “effect and demand of labor utilization,” the implication is that “labor” (meaning American workers) will be considered yet one more resource to be seized for the purposes of “national defense.” The EO reads,

Sec. 601. Secretary of Labor. (a) The Secretary of Labor, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other agencies, as deemed appropriate by the Secretary of Labor, shall:

(1) collect and maintain data necessary to make a continuing appraisal of the Nation's workforce needs for purposes of national defense;

(2) upon request by the Director of Selective Service, and in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, assist the Director of Selective Service in development of policies regulating the induction and deferment of persons for duty in the armed services;

(3) upon request from the head of an agency with authority under this order, consult with that agency with respect to: (i) the effect of contemplated actions on labor demand and utilization; (ii) the relation of labor demand to materials and facilities requirements; and (iii) such other matters as will assist in making the exercise of priority and allocations functions consistent with effective utilization and distribution of labor;

Notice that the language of the EO does not state “in the event of a national emergency.” Instead, we are given the term “purposes of national defense.” This is because the “authorities” assumed by the President have been assumed not just for arbitrary declarations of “national emergency” but for peacetime as well. Indeed, the EO states this much directly when it says,

The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 107(b)(1) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2077(b)(1), to take appropriate action to ensure that critical components, critical technology items, essential materials, and industrial resources are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency.

Presidential Executive Orders have long been used illegally by Presidents of every political shade and have often been used to destroy the rights of American citizens. Although history has often come to judge these orders as both immoral and unconstitutional, the fact is that the victims of the orders suffered no less because of the retroactive judgment of their progeny. It is for this reason that we must immediately condemn and resist such obvious usurpation as is currently being attempted by the U.S. government.

Nevertheless, some have no doubt begun to wonder why the President has signed such an order. Not only that, but why did he sign the order now? Is it because of the looming war with Iran or the Third World War that will likely result from such a conflict? Is it because of the ticking time bomb called the economy that is only one jittery move or trade deal away from total disintegration? Is it because of a growing sense of hatred of their government amongst the general public? Is there a coming natural disaster of which we are unaware? Are there plans for martial law?

Whatever the reason for the recent announcement of Obama’s new Executive Order, there is one thing we do know for sure – “It wouldn’t happen here” has been the swan song of almost every victim of democide in modern human history.


Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor's Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at) gmail.com.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Many of the comments I receive indicate there are people out there that just simply refuse to believe what is going on in our National government.

To those people I say this, you will rue the day you refused to prepare for the coming total destruction of our way of life, and once lost, this generation will not have the ability to reconstruct it. Since I am a mere man I cannot predict the future, but the evidence before me is too overwhelming to refute, and if we do not unite and fight back NOW, our future is cut and dried. Are you ready to die of starvation, or slaughtered by vandals? Are you prepared to die standing up and fighting like a man, or are you going to beg for your life and serve the tyrants? These are your choices, make them now. The alternative is to have fifty million citizens demanding our military take out the International Banking Cartel, and redistribute their assets globally. Then start up State Banks like North Dakota, with a commodity backed dollar. Takeout the stud ducks and the flock will disperse. We can keep them from repeating this by having an honest currency. There is no other way to stop this insane suicide. 


SEO Powered By SEOPressor