Log in



Categories » ‘Constitution’

WHY SHOULD GOD BLESS AMERICA?

February 23rd, 2012 by

 

THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF AMERICA

http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave270.htm

By Coach Dave Daubenmire

February 23, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Martin Niemoller: "Our concern here, Herr Hitler, is not for the church. Jesus Christ will take care of the church. Our concern is for the soul of the nation."

Adolph Hitler: "You can leave the soul of Germany to me."

Words have meaning. My perspective on life was altered when I came to that realization. We live in a nation where we believe every “expert.” We have been trained to listen, but not to think.

We share a common language, but we do not realize that words mean different things to different people. For a greater perspective, read my commentary Change the Words, Change the World.

I used to think that the term “pro-life” meant that a person was against abortion. Sorry Charlie.Most “pro-lifers” are pro-choice…they just think that “life” is the “correct” choice. They do not hate abortion and do not fight to outlaw it.

That’s why so many politicians claim to be “Pro-Life,” yet abortion remains legal. Republicans tend to be “Pro-Life,” but they don’t really want to stop the butchering of babies.

But we think they do. We think “Pro-Life” means “stop abortion.” It doesn’t.

“Conservative” is another one of those words. Most of us here in fly-over country assume that “conservative” is a belief system. In reality, it is just a “position” that political candidates claim to hold. “Pro-Life” is one of those “conservative” positions.

That’s why they break “conservatives” into classes; “social” conservatives, “fiscal” conservatives, “judicial” conservatives, “neo” conservatives, and ironically, “Christian” conservatives.

You would think that most Christians would be “conservatives,” but of course, you would be mistaken. There are “liberal” Christians, “social-justice” Christians, “fundamentalist” Christians, “moderate” Christians, and my favorite, “Bible-believing” Christians. You see, not even “Christianity” is a one-size-fits-all description. Just like “conservative.” Just like Republican.

While most “conservatives” are Republicans, not all Republicans are “conservative.” They are not the same. I explain it here. I’m not even sure what “Christian” or “conservative” means anymore.

Let me get to the point. The “non-conservative” Republicans control the Republican Party.

Wake up folks. Our ignorance is destroying us. The Republicans and the Democrats are merely two wings of the same vulture. They represent the “Political-Class;” those who make their living off of bigger government. Their currency is PMS…Power…Money…Sex.

They are one party masquerading as two; The Democrat Political-Class and The Republican Political-Class. They fight over which side gets control of the money, not over issues.

The Republican Political-Class is fighting like mad to see Romney get the nomination because he is “more electable.” “More Electable” means Romney won’t “rock the boat” and the Republican Political-Class gets their turn to play quarterback. Either way, the “Political-Class” calls all of the plays.

Romney has run for President for five years, yet he still can’t get more than 30% of the Republican vote. Most of his 30% are the Political-Class Republicans. Heck, he could get that much if he challenged Obama in the Democratic Political-Class Primary.

Gallup reports that 42% of voters identify as conservative, 35% as moderate, and only 20% liberals. The “conservatives” only need 9% of the “moderate” vote to win. Yet the Republican Political-Class is pushing a “moderate” as their candidate. Meanwhile, the “liberals” are destroying this country.

The big myth is that Republicans represent “conservatives” when they don’t. It is the “moderate” Republicans who split the “conservative” vote by nominating RINOS. Some “moderate” Republicans voted for Obama. Some “conservative” Democrats didn’t. Lindsey Graham is a member of the Republican Political-Class, as are Susan Collins, Karl Rove, Olympia Snowe, and John McCain. Do they represent you?

Let’s face it. Both major political parties are for bigger government. A vote for either party is a vote for more government courtesy of the “Political-Class.” Their plan is to nominate a “moderate” to oppose a “leftist”, and leave “conservatives”, the majority, with no place to go.

THE TEA PARTY IS THE CONSERVATIVE BASE. Have you noticed how both sides of the “Political-Class” hate the “tea-baggers?” The Tea Party IS the opposition party to the “Political-Class.” The Tea Party must seize control of the Republican Party. It is the only chance to return power to the people.

I love to hear the media prattle on about the dangers of a “third party.” I would love to see a SECOND party; One that actually brings change. In my lifetime the Republican Party has nominated Eisenhower, Nixon, Goldwater, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Dole, Bush II, and McCain. The Political-Class has continued to grow and national morality has continued its rapid plunge into the toilet as the Republicans moved farther and farther left.

Today, there is no “conservative” party.

Rick Santorum has raised a fire-storm because he is speaking about the “social” values. Right on cue, both wings of the Political-Class begin to yap about how “social” values cannot win in the general election. Folks, “conservative social” values still win the day. That is why the pigs are squealing so loudly. Even the Paul-bots don’t like the “social” issues. Many of them want freedom without responsibility.

If lying, stealing, and fornicating once again became taboo in America; if we once again began to demand those values of our children and our leaders, The Political-Class would no longer have a platform upon which to stand.

Santorum has seen a meteoric rise. He is speaking the language that a majority of Americans understand. He has said such things as “Satan has his sights on the United States of America…attacking the great institutions of America, using those great vices of pride, vanity and sensuality as the root to attack all of the strong plants that has so deeply rooted in the American tradition.” He called Satan, “The Father of Lies.” JN 8:44

When it comes to social values he doesn’t need a teleprompter. He knows that song by heart. He understands that the heart of the problem is that America has a problem of the heart. Our government is a reflection of our people. We must return to Truth.

The “Political-Class” has taken America hard left. A “moderate” correction will not bring us back to the middle. Only a hard-right can keep the one-winged eagle from a death spiral.

“Conservatives” hold deep-seated beliefs. “Republicans” hold political positions. They are not the same. If a “moderate” faces a “leftist” in 2012, “conservatives” cannot win. Ignorance is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

I support most of what Ron Paul stands for, but he fails to understand the importance of “social issues.” He calls them a “losing position.”

 

Isn’t fiat currency a social issue? What about the crap your kids are learning in government schools? Isn’t government theft a social issue? Abortion, marriage, war…aren’t they “social” issues?” Do you mean socialism is not a “social issue?”

Don’t let them blow smoke at you. It is not about contraception or women’s rights. It is about right and wrong. Right and wrong is not a state’s-rights issue. Right and wrong is a human rights issue.

It is time we drew a line and had a fight over the moral issues. Christians have given ground for far too long. It is time we had the debate. It is time to rise up against the cultural, moral rot.

The battle over right and wrong is THE political issue of our time. If this election is lost I don’t want it to be over tax cuts. The battle lines are drawn. Let’s get it on. Let’s force the “moderates” to go third-party.

“But the media tells us that a conservative will lose!!”

Wake-up, Pal. We are already losing. Stupid is as stupid does.

 

Click Here for an audio version of this commentary.

Order the CDs here.

 

Do you think like a Christian or a humanist? Did the Founders really separate Church and State? Is Judicial tyranny ruining America? Check out these great teachings by the Coach

© 2012 Dave Daubenmire – All Rights Reserved


Coach Dave Daubenmire, founder and President of Pass The Salt Ministries www.ptsalt.com and Minutemen United www.minutemenunited.org, is host of the high octane Pass The Salt radio show heard in Columbus, Ohio.

In 1999 Coach Daubenmire was sued by the ACLU for praying with his teams while coaching high school in Ohio. He now spends his energy fighting for Christian principles in the public domain.

E-Mail: coach@ptsalt.com

 

HUMAN DEPRAVITY

 

The Global Crises of Capitalism: Whose Crises, Who Profits?

February 23rd, 2012 by

 

 

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29388

 

By Prof. James Petras

 

Introduction

 

From the Financial Times to the far left, tons of ink has been spilt writing about some variant of the “Crises of Global Capitalism”. While writers differ in the causes, consequences and cures, according to their ideological lights, there is a common agreement that “the crises” threatens to end the capitalist system as we know it.

There is no doubt that, between  2008-2009, the capitalist system in Europe and the United States suffered a severe shock that shook the foundations of its financial system and threatened to bankrupt its ‘leading sectors’.

However, I will argue the ‘crises of capitalism’ was turned into a ‘crises of labor’. Finance capital, the principle detonator of the crash and crises, recovered, the capitalist class as a whole was strengthened, and most important of all, it utilized the political, social, ideological conditions created as a result of “the crises” to further consolidate their dominance and exploitation over the rest of society.

In other words, the ‘crises of capital’ has been converted into a strategic advantage for furthering the most fundamental interests of capital: the enlargement of profits, the consolidation of capitalist rule, the greater concentration of ownership, the deepening of inequalities between capital and labor and the creation of huge reserves of labor to further augment their profits.

Furthermore, the notion of a homogeneous global crisis of capitalism overlooks profound differences in performance and conditions, between countries, classes, and age cohorts.

The Global Crises Thesis: The Economic and Social Argument

The advocates of global crises argue that beginning in 2007 and continuing to the present, the world capitalist system has collapsed and recovery is a mirage. They cite stagnation and continuing recession in North America and the Eurozone. They offer GDP data hovering between negative to zero growth. Their argument is backed by data citing double digit unemployment in both regions. They frequently correct the official data which understates the percentage unemployed by excluding part-time, long-term unemployed workers and others. The ‘crises’ argument is strengthened by citing the millions of homeowners who have been evicted by the banks, the sharp increase in poverty and destitution accompanying job loses, wage reductions and the elimination or reduction of social services. “”Crises” is also associated with the massive increase in bankruptcies of mostly small and medium size businesses and regional banks.

 

The Global Crises: The Loss of Legitimacy

 

Critics, especially in the financial press, write of a “legitimacy crises of capitalism” citing polls showing substantial majorities questioning the in justice s of the capitalist system, the vast and growing inequalities and the rigged rules by which banks exploit their size (“too big to fail”) to raid the Treasury at the expense of social programs.

In summary the advocates of the thesis of a “Global Crises of Capitalism” make a strong case, demonstrating the profound and pervasive destructive effects of the capitalist system on the lives of the great majority of humanity.

The problem is that a ‘crises of humanity’ (more specifically of salary ad wage workers) is not the same as a crisis of the capitalist system. In fact as we shall argue below growing social adversity, declining income and employment has been a major factor facilitating the rapid and massive recovery of the profit margins of most large scale corporations.

Moreover, the thesis of a global crises of capitalism amalgamates disparate economies, countries, classes and age cohorts with sharply divergent performances at different historical moments.

 

Global Crises or Uneven and Unequal Development?

 

It is utterly foolish to argue for a “global crises” when several of the major economies in the world economy did not suffer a major downturn and others recovered and expanded rapidly. China and India did not suffer even a recession. Even during the worst years of the Euro-US decline, the Asian giants grew on average about 8%. Latin America’s economies especially the major agro-mineral export countries (Brazil, Argentina, Chile, ) with diversified markets, especially in Asia, paused briefly (in 2009) before assuming moderate to rapid growth (between 3% to 7%) from 2010-2012.

By aggregating economic data from the Euro-zone as a whole the advocates of global crises, overlooked the enormous disparities in performance within the zone. While Southern Europe wallows in a deep sustained depression, by any measure, from 2008 to the foreseeable future, German exports, in 2011, set a record of a trillion euros; its trade surplus reached 158 billion euros, after a155 billion euro surpluses in 2010. (BBC News, Feb. 8 2012).

While aggregate Eurozone unemployment reaches 10.4%, the internal differences defy any notion of a “general crises”. Unemployment in Holland is 4.9%, Austria 4.1% and Germany 5.5% with employer claims of widespread skilled labor shortages in key growth sectors. On the other hand in exploited southern Europe unemployment runs to depression levels, Greece 21%, Spain 22.9%, Ireland 14.5%, and Portugal 13.6% (FT 1/19/12, p.7). In other words, “the crises” does not adversely affect some economies, that in fact profit from their market dominance and techno-financial strength over dependent, debtor and backward economies. To speak of a ‘global crises’ obscures the fundamental dominant and exploitative relations that facilitate ‘recovery’ and growth of the elite economies over and against their competitors and client states. In addition global crises theorists wrongly amalgamated crises ridden, financial-speculative economies (US, England ) with dynamic productive export economies ( Germany , China ).

The second problem with the thesis of a “global crises” is that it overlooks profound internal differences between age cohorts. In several European countries youth unemployment (16-25) runs between 30 to 50% (Spain 48.7%, Greece 47.2%, Slovakia 35.6%, Italy 31%, Portugal 30.8% and Ireland 29%) while in Germany, Austria and Holland youth unemployment runs to Germany 7.8%, Austria 8.2% and Netherlands 8.6% (Financial Times (FT) 2/1/12, p2). These differences underlie the reason why there is not a ‘global youth movement’ of “indignant” and “occupiers” .Five-fold differences between unemployed youth is not conducive to ‘international’ solidarity. The concentration of high youth unemployment figures explains the uneven development of mass- street protests especially centered in Southern Europe . It also explains why the northern Euro-American “anti-globalization” movement is largely a lifeless forum which attracts academic pontification on the “global capitalist crises” and the impotence of the “Social Forums” are unable to attract millions of unemployed youth from Southern Europe .They are more attracted to direct action. Globalist theorists overlook the specific way in which the mass of unemployed young workers are exploited in their dependent debt ridden countries. They ignore the specific way they are ruled and repressed by center-left and rightist capitalist parties. The contrast is most evident in the winter of 2012. Greek workers are pressured to accept a 20% cut in minimum wages while in Germany workers are demanding a 6% increase.

If the ‘crises’ of capitalism is manifested in specific regions, so too does it affect different age/racial sectors of the wage and salaries classes. The unemployment rates of youth to older workers varies enormously: in Italy it is 3.5/1, Greece 2.5/1, Portugal 2.3/1, Spain 2.1/1 and Belgium 2.9/1. In Germany it is 1.5/1 (FT 2/1/12). In other words because of the higher levels of unemployment among youth they have a greater propensity for direct action ‘against the system’; while older workers with higher levels of employment (and unemployment benefits) have shown a greater propensity to rely on the ballot box and engage in limited strikes over job and pay related issues. The vast concentration of unemployed among young workers means they form the ‘available core’ for sustained action; but it also means that they can only achieve limited unity of action with the older working class experiencing single digit unemployment.

However, it is also true that the great mass of unemployment youth provides a formidable weapon, in the hands of employers to threaten to replace employed older workers. Today, capitalists constantly resort to using the unemployed to lower wages and benefits and to intensify exploitation (dubbed to “increase productivity”) to increase profit margins. Far from being simply an indicater of ‘capitalist crises’, high levels of unemployment have served along with other factors’ to increase the rate of profit, accumulate income, widen income inequalities which augments the consumption of luxury goods for the capitalist class: the sales of luxury cars and watches is booming.

 

Class Crises: The Counter-Thesis

 

Contrary to the “global capitalist crises” theorists, a substantial amount of data has surfaced which refutes its assumptions. A recent study reports “US corporate profits are higher as a share of gross domestic product than at any time since 1950” (FT 1/30/12). US companies cash balances have never been greater, thanks to intensified exploitation of workers, and a multi-tiered wage systems in which new hires work for a fraction of what older workers receive (thanks to agreements signed by ‘door mat’ labor bosses).

The “crises of capitalism” ideologues have ignored the financial reports of the major US corporations. According to General Motors 2011 report to its stockholders, they celebrated the greatest profit ever, turning a profit of $7.6 billion, surpassing the previous record of $6.7 billion in 1997. A large part of these profits results from the freezing of its underfunded US pension funds and extracting greater productivity from fewer workers-in other words intensified exploitation-and cutting hourly wages of new hires by half. (EarthLink News 2/16/12)

Moreover the increased importance of imperialist exploitation is evident as the share of US corporate profits extracted overseas keeps rising at the expense of employee income growth. In 2011, the US economy grew by 1.7%,but median wages fell by 2.7%.According to the financial press” the profit margins of the S and P 500 leapt from

6% to 9% of the GDP in the past three years, a share last achieved three generations ago. At roughly a third, the foreign share of these profits has more than doubled since 2000”(FT 2/13/12 P9.If this is a “capitalist crises” then who needs a capitalist boom ?

Surveys of top corporations reveal that US companies are holding 1.73 trillion in cash, “the fruits of record high profit margins” (FT 1/30/12 p.6). These record profit margins result from mass firings which have led to intensifying exploitation of the remaining workers. Also, negligible federal interest rates and easy access to credit allow capitalists to exploit vast differentials between borrowing and lending and investing. Lower taxes and cuts in social programs result in a growing cash pile for corporations. Within the corporate structure, income goes to the top where senior executives pay themselves huge bonuses. Among the leading S and P 500 corporations the proportion of income that goes to dividends for stockholders is the lowest since 1900 (FT 1/30/12, p.6).

A real capitalist crisis would adversely affect profit margins, gross earnings and the accumulation of “cash piles”. Rising profits are being horded because as capitalists profit from intense exploitation, mass consumption stagnates.

Crises theorists confuse what is clearly the degrading of labor, the savaging of living and working conditions and even the stagnation of the economy, with a ‘crises’ of capital: when the capitalist class increases its profit margins, hoards trillions, it is not in crises. The key point is that the ‘crises of labor’ is a major stimulus for the recovery of capitalist profits. We cannot generalize from one to the other. No doubt there was a moment of capitalist crises (2008-2009) but thanks to the capitalist state’s unprecedented massive transfer of wealth from the public treasury to the capitalist class – Wall Street banks in the first instance – the corporate sector recovered, while the workers and the rest of the economy remained in crises, went bankrupt and out of work.

 

From Crises to Recovery of Profits: 2008/9 to 2012

 

The key to the ‘recovery’ of corporate profits had little to do with the business cycle and all to do with Wall Street’s large-scale takeover and pillage of the US Treasury. Between 2009-2012 hundreds of former Wall Street executives, managers and investment advisers seized all the major decision-making positions in the Treasury Department and channeled trillions of dollars into leading financial and corporate coffers. They intervened financially troubled corporations, like General Motors, imposing major wage cuts and dismissals of thousands of workers.

Wall Streeters in Treasury elaborated the doctrine of “Too Big to Fail” to justify the massive transfer of wealth. The entire speculative edifice built in part by a 234 fold rise in foreign exchange trading volume between 1977-2010 was restored (FT 1/10/12, p.7). The new doctrine argued that the state’s first and principle priority is to return the financial system to profitability at any and all cost to society, citizens, taxpayers and workers. “Too Big to Fail” is a complete repudiation of the most basic principle of the “free market” capitalist system: the idea that those capitalists who lose bear the consequences; that each investor or CEO, is responsible for their action. Financial capitalists no longer needed to justify their activity in terms of any contribution to the growth of the economy or “social utility”. According to the current rulers Wall Street must be saved because it is Wall Street, even if the rest of the economy and people sink (FT 1/20/12, p.11). State bailouts and financing are complemented by hundreds of billions in tax concessions, leading to unprecedented fiscal deficits and the growth of massive social inequalities. The pay of CEO’s as a multiple of the average worker went from 24 to 1 in 1965 to 325 in 2010 (FT 1/9/12, p.5).

The ruling class flaunts their wealth and power aided and abetted by the White House and Treasury. In the face of popular hostility to Wall Street pillage of Treasury, Obama went through the sham of asking Treasury to impose a cap on the multi-million dollar bonuses that the CEO’s running bailed out banks awarded themselves. Wall Streeters in Treasury refused to enforce the executive order, the CEO’s got billions in bonuses in 2011 . President Obama went along, thinking he conned the US public with his phony gesture, while he reaped millions in campaign funds from Wall Street!

The reason Treasury has been taken over by Wall Street is that in the 1990’s and 2000’s, banks became a leading force in Western economies. Their share of the GDP rose sharply (from 2% in the 1950’s to 8% in 2010” (FT 1/10/12, p.7).

Today it is “normal operating procedure” for President’s to appoint Wall Streeter’s to all key economic positions; and it is ‘normal’ for these same officials to pursue policies that maximize Wall Street profits and eliminate any risk of failure no matter how risky and corrupt their practioners.

 

The Revolving Door: From Wall Street to Treasury and Return

 

Effectively the relation between Wall Street and Treasury has become a “revolving door”: from Wall Street to the Treasury Department to Wall Street. Private bankers take appointments in Treasury (or are recruited) to ensure that all resources and policies Wall Street needs are granted with maximum effort, with the least hindrance from citizens, workers or taxpayers. Wall Streeters in Treasury give highest priority to Wall Street survival, recovery and expansion of profits. They block any regulations or restrictions on bonuses or a repeat of past swindles.

Wall Streeters ‘make a reputation’ in Treasury and then return to the private sector in higher positions, as senior advisers and partners. A Treasury appointment is a ladder up the Wall Street hierarchy. Treasury is a filling station to the Wall Street Limousine: ex Wall Streeters fill up the tank, check the oil and then jump in the front seat and zoom to a lucrative job and let the filling station (public) pay the bill.

Approximately 774 officials (and counting) departed from Treasury between January 2009 and August 2011 (FT 2/6/12, p. 7). All provided lucrative “services” to their future Wall Street bosses finding it a great way to re-enter private finance at a higher more lucrative position.

A report in the Financial Times Feb. 6, 2012 (p. 7) entitled appropriately Manhattan Transfer” provides typical illustrations of the Treasury-Wall Street “revolving door”.

Ron Bloom went from a junior banker at Lazard to Treasury, helping to engineer the trillion dollar bailout of Wall Street and returned to Lazard as a senior adviser. Jake Siewert went from Wall Street to becoming a top aide to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and then graduated to Goldman Sachs, having served to undercut any cap on Wall Street bonuses.

Michael Mundaca, the most senior tax official in the Obama regime came from the Street and then went on to a highly lucrative post in Ernst and Young a corporate accounting firm, having helped write down corporate taxes during his stint in “public office”.

Eric Solomon, a senior tax official in the infamous corporate tax free Bush Administration made the same switch. Jeffrey Goldstein who Obama put in charge of financial regulation and succeeded in undercutting popular demands, returned to his previous employer Hellman and Friedman with the appropriate promotion for services rendered.

Stuart Levey who ran AIPAC sanctions against Iran policies out if Treasury’s so-called “anti- terrorist agency” was hired as general counsel by HSBC to defend it from investigations for money laundering (FT 2/6/12, p. 7). In this case Levey moved from promoting Israel’s ’ war aims to defending an international bank accused of laundering billions in Mexican cartel money. Levey, by the way spent so much time pursuing Israel’s ’ Iran agenda that he totally ignored the Mexican drug cartels’ billion dollar money laundering cross-border operations for the better part of a decade.

Lew Alexander a senior advisor to Geithner in designing the trillion dollar bail out is now a senior official in Nomura, the Japanese bank. Lee Sachs went from Treasury to Bank Alliance, (his own “lending platform”). James Millstein went from Lazard to Treasury bailed out AIG insurance run into the ground by Greenberg and then established his own private investment firm taking a cluster of well-connected Treasury officials with him.

The Goldman-Sachs-Treasury “revolving door” continues today. In addition to past and current Treasury heads Paulson and Geithner, former Goldman partner Mark Patterson was recently appointed Geithner’s “chief of staff”. Tim Bowler former Goldman managing director was appointed by Obama to head up the capital markets division.

It should be abundantly clear that elections, parties and the billion dollar electoral campaigns have little to do with “democracy” and more to do with selecting the President and legislators who will appoint non-elected Wall Streeters to make all the strategic economic decisions for the 99% of Americans. The policy results of the Wall Street-Treasury revolving door are clear and provide us with a framework for understanding why the “profit crises” has vanished and the crises of labor has deepened.

 

The “Policy Achievements” of the Revolving Door

 

The Wall Street-Treasury conundrum (WSTC) has performed herculean and audacious labor for finance and corporate capital. In the face of universal condemnation of Wall Street by the vast majority of the public for its swindles, bankruptcies, job losses and mortgage foreclosures, the WSTC publically backed the swindlers with a trillion dollar bailout. A daring move on the face of it; that is if majorities and elections counted for anything. Equally important the WSTC dumped the entire “free market” ideology that justified capitalist profits based on its “risks”, by imposing the new dogma of “too big to fail” in which the state treasury guarantees profits even when capitalists face bankruptcy, providing they are billion dollar firms. The WSTC dumped the capitalist principle of “fiscal responsibility” in favor of hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts for the corporate-financial ruling class, running up record peace time budget deficits and then having the audacity to blame the social programs

supported by popular majorities. (Is it any wonder these ex-Treasury officials get such lucrative offers in the private sector when they leave public office?) Thirdly, Treasury and the Central Bank (Federal Reserve) provide near zero interest loans that guarantees big profits to private financial institution which borrow low from the Fed and lend high, (including back to the Government!) especially in purchasing overseas Government and corporate bonds. They receive anywhere from four to ten times the interest rates they pay. In other words the taxpayers provide a monstrous subsidy for Wall Street speculation. With the added proviso, that today these speculative activities are now insured by the Federal government, under the “Too Big to Fail” doctrine.

Under the ideology of “regaining competitiveness” the Obama economic team (from Treasury, the Federal Reserve, Commerce, Labor) has encouraged employers to engage in the most aggressive shedding of workers in modern history. Increased productivity and profitability is not the result of “innovation” as Obama, Geithner and Bernache claim; it is a product of a state labor policy which deepens inequality by holding down wages and raising profit margins. Fewer workers producing more commodities. Cheap credit and bailouts for the billion dollar banks and no refinancing for households and small and medium size firms leading to bankruptcies, buyouts and ‘consolidation’ namely, greater concentration of ownership. As a result the mass market stagnates but corporate and bank profits reach record levels. According to financial experts under the WSTC “new order” “bankers are a protected class who enjoy bonuses regardless of performance, while relying on the taxpayer to socialize their losses” (FT 1/9/12, p.5). In contrast, labor, under Obama’s economic team, faces the greatest insecurity and most threatening situation in recent history: “in what is unquestionably novel is the ferocity with which US business sheds labor now that executive pay and incentive schemes are linked to short term performance targets” (FT 1/9/2012, p. 5).

 

Economic Consequences of State Policies

 

Because of the Wall Street “takeover” of strategic economic policy positions in Government we can now understand the paradox of record profit margins in the midst of economic stagnation. We can comprehend why the capitalist crises has, at least temporarily, been replaced by a profound crises of labor. Within the power matrix of Wall Street-Treasury Dept. all the old corrupt and exploitative practices that led up to the 2008-2009 crash have returned: multi-billion dollar bonuses for investment bankers who led the economy into the crash; banks “snapping up billions of dollars of bundled mortgage products that resemble the sliced and diced debt some (sic) blame for the financial crises” (FT 2/8/12, p.1). The difference today is that these speculative instruments are now backed by the taxpayer (Treasury). The supremacy of the financial structure of the pre-crises US economy is in place and thriving … “only”, the US labor force has sunk into greater unemployment, declining living standards, widespread insecurity and profound discontent.

 

Conclusion: The Case Against Capitalism and for Socialism

 

The profound crises of 2008-2009 provoked a spate of questioning of the capitalist system, even among many of its most ardent advocates (FT 1/8/12 to 1/30/12) criticism abounded. ‘Reform, regulation and redistribution’ were the fare of financial columnists. Yet the ruling economic and governing class took no heed. The workers are controlled by door mat union leaders and lack a political instrument. The rightwing pseudo populists embrace an even more virulent pro capitalist agenda, calling for across the board elimination of social programs and corporate taxes. Inside the state, a major transformation has taken place which effectively smashed any link between capitalism and social welfare, between government decision-making and the electorate. Democracy has been replaced by a corporate state, founded on the revolving door between Treasury and Wall Street, which funnels public wealth to private financial coffers. The breach between the welfare of society and the operations of the financial architecture is definitive.

The activity of Wall Street has no social utility, its practitioners enrich themselves with no redeeming activity. Capitalism has demonstrated conclusively, that it thrives through the degradation of tens of millions of workers and rejects the endless pleas for reform and regulation. Real existing capitalism cannot be harnessed to raising living standards or ensuring employment free of fear of large scale, sudden and brutal firings. Capitalism, as we experience it over the past decade and for the foreseeable future, is in polar opposition to social equality, democratic decision-making and collective welfare.

Record capitalist profits are accrued by pillaging the public treasury, denying pensions and prolonging ‘work till you die’, bankrupting most families with exorbitant private corporate medical and educational costs.

More than ever in recent history, record majorities reject the rule by and for the bankers and the corporate ruling class (FT 2/6/12, p. 6). Inequalities between the top 1% and the bottom 99% have reached record proportions. CEO’s earn 325 times that of an average worker (FT 1/9/12, p.5). Since the state has become the ‘foundation’ of the economy of the Wall Street predators, and since ‘reform’ and regulation has dismally failed, it is time to consider a fundamental systemic transformation that begins via a political revolution which forcibly ousts the non-elected financial and corporate elites running the state for their own exclusive interests. The entire political process, including elections, are profoundly corrupt: each level of office has its own inflated price tag. The current Presidential contest will cost $2 to $3 billion dollars to determine which of the servants of Wall Street will preside over the revolving door.

Socialism is no longer the scare word of the past. Socialism involves the large-scale reorganization of the economy, the transfer of trillions from the coffers of predator classes’ of no social utility to the public welfare. This change can finance a productive and innovative economy based on work and leisure, study and sport. Socialism replaces the everyday terror of dismissal with the security that brings confidence, assurance and respect to the workplace. Workplace democracy is at the heart of the vision of 21st century socialism. We begin by nationalizing the banks and eliminating Wall Street. Financial institutions are redesigned to create productive employment, to serve social welfare and to preserve the environment. Socialism would begin the transition, from a capitalist economy directed by predators and swindlers and a state at their command, toward an economy of public ownership under democratic control.

James Petras' most recent book is The Arab Revolt and the Imperialist Counter Attack (Clarity Press 2012) 2nd edition.

 

 

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Have I not warned you of Global Research’s Socialist intent? Notice how expertly they itemize all of the atrocities the elite’s heap on the backs of the working class, enrage you with their greed, then imply that socialism is the answer to all of our problems. They are experts at manipulating the human mind, and promoting socialism as the cure all.

AND, the sad part of this is, IT WORKS, because the average worker is ignorant of socialism’s failed promises’, and the extraordinary regulations that the workers are finally throttled with outside of their occupations. SOCIALISM SUCKS, JUST AS ITS PROMOTERS DO!

The only cure for the atrocities being heaped on our backs is intelligent regulation of Banking, and investment firms, plus honest politicians. Political accountability is the only way out of this quicksand economy. If the politicians will not stay honest, throw them to the dogs, and laugh at their screams of torment.

Send the international banker to hell, along with their families.

Exterminate their genes from the face of the earth, or your children will be their children’s slaves, and concubines.

AMERICA,

The land of the free and the home of the brave, my ASS, American’s no longer have the balls to save their own children!

 

SOCIALISM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SHERIFFS TO THE RESCUE

February 22nd, 2012 by

 

http://www.newswithviews.com/Pratt/larry125.htm

By Larry Pratt 
February 21, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Richard Mack is well known as the first of eventually six sheriffs to take on the Brady Law. And, much to the delight of pro-gunners around the country, the Supreme Court agreed with Mack in 1995 that the federal government did not have constitutional authority to force state officials to conduct background checks.

Mack is no longer in office, but that has not stopped him from staying involved in promoting constitutional issues. He is now taking the lead in informing sheriffs of the authority they have as the chief law enforcement officer in their counties. While this has come as a surprise to many federal officials, the Constitution is quite specific in terms of what they are allowed to do. Almost all the powers which “We the People” have delegated to the federal government are listed in the 18 clauses found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

Sheriffs find that when they warn the feds not to conduct an unconstitutional police action against one of their citizens, the feds back down. Sometimes the feds threaten to arrest them, but when the sheriff’s response is “game on,” the stalemate ends with the feds backing down.

I recently attended the first conference of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. Nearly 100 sheriffs attended, in addition to many police chiefs and some county councilmen. One of the encouraging things about the conference was that while many of the sheriffs there were not initially willing to risk a confrontation with the feds, they are now willing to do so after hearing the testimonies from many of their fellow constables. It was very educational for them to hear how different sheriffs have “faced down” the feds.

For example, Tony DeMeo is a former Jersey City cop who ended up getting elected as Sheriff in Nye County, Nevada. He became a pivotal player in his county by protecting citizens from an outrageous abuse of power that was perpetrated by the Bureau of Land Management.

Pro-gun activists will remember the stalwart Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho who served in the 1990s. Well her husband, Wayne Hage leased acreage for his ranch from the BLM. Hage had ownership of the water rights — as long as he used the water at least once during the year.

Later, the BLM decided that Hage did not belong on the land, and so they began to confiscate his cattle. After the second theft, Hage enlisted DeMeo's assistance, which helped him deal with the BLM when they arrived a third time to confiscate even more cattle. Sheriff DeMeo confronted the BLM agents and backed them down to the point where Hage no longer had to worry about the BLM's larceny anymore.

After Hage’s death, his son won a lawsuit begun by his dad against the federales, and now a court ruling has established that the Hage family can live without fear of their government stealing their property.

It is clear that there are many sheriffs who are willing to protect their counties, but do not know what they can — and should — do. The Gun Owners online book store carries Richard Mack’s little book The County Sheriff, America’s Last Hope (http://gunowners.org/store/books). If your sheriff is not aware of his powers – and his responsibility – please give him a copy of this book.

We can put the federal Jeanie back in the bottle, one sheriff at a time.

© 2012 Larry Pratt – All Rights Reserved

Sheriff

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: on the Problems of Central Bank Debt ‘Capitalism’ and the Promise of U. S. – Style State Banking

February 20th, 2012 by

http://thedailybell.com/3627/Anthony-Wile-Marilyn-McGruder-Barnewall-on

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

This is the lady who taught me to never begin a debate with your intellectual superiors, unless you enjoy being humiliated. Fortunately, for me, this lady has taken me under her wing and taught me things I could never have learned without her. I have a free autographed copy of her first book and a pre-publication word document of her second. You would not believe how intuitive she was in presenting the subject as a novel, instead of a treatise. These are two books that make a difficult subject a delightful learning experience. I am proud to consider myself her grasshopper, which only people over forty will understand. This is a subject that every American will benefit from learning.

Without central banking, America would be the shining star of the world, and the Rothschild’s, & Rockefellers, would just be grumpy old men. Can you imagine an honest federal government? If there are two people in America with the knowledge to turn it around, it is Marilyn Barnewall and Walter Burien, of CAFR1.com. They both deserve your support, which begins by learning what they know so well. Google their names and learn all you can.

State sovereignty begins with State Banking, and keeping our profits begins with Walter’s Tax Retirement Fund.

 

STATE BANKING

 

with Anthony Wile

The Daily Bell is pleased to present this interview with Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall (left).

Introduction:  Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall served as president of The MacGruder Agency, Inc., a bank financial consulting firm, from 1979 through 1993. She was known as the "guru" of North American Private Banking (so-called by Town and Country and Trust and Estates magazines) and a 1989 issue of Forbes magazine called her the "Dean of American Private Banking." Today, Ms. Barnewall is retired and has devoted her energies to writing books, articles and legislation focused on state banking and, generally, the devolution of American banking. Some of her ideas are similar to those of "public-banking" advocate Ellen Brown

Daily Bell: Tell us more about your background and how you got into this field.

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: I became a banker quite by accident in 1972. I worked at Denver's largest bank and I started the first private bank in the United States. I started the MacGruder Agency when I left the bank in 1979, and was a consultant implementing credit-driven private banks until 1993.

I have also written a number of books. The first book I wrote, which I think is still one of the only books on private banking, is called Profitable Private Banking: The Complete Blueprint, which was published by the American Bankers Association and sold for $5,000 a copy. I went back to writing and have written hundreds of articles for Internet publications since.

Daily Bell: What is "credit-driven private banking"?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: There are two types of private banking, and it is different than what you might think. Traditionally, private banking is and always has been the management of other people's money or assets. The one I created was a credit-driven form of private banking.

Basically, credit-driven private banking is done in a way that strengthens and broadens the middle class. During my time as a bank advisor, I basically created a concept of banking that enabled lenders to make business purpose loans based on personal assets and cash flow. So a business-purpose loan, a commercial loan, depends for repayment on the purpose of the loan. If the purpose of the loan is to make cars, then the source of repayment comes from the sale of those cars, the dealers or the public. In other words, individuals can't do that because they aren't in the business of selling cars or building condominiums. It's recognizing all the potential available.

Daily Bell: Tell us about the work you have been doing in relation to state banks and the resolution for the State of Colorado.  

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: I recently wrote the legislation for the State of Colorado for state banks. The movement to create state banks is a growing one. I started writing about state banks a little over two years ago. Many people are very confused about what a state bank is. Basically, it is two things: it is an administrator and it is a correspondent bank. That's it. It is not the bank that sits on Main Street. A state bank also takes in tax revenues; all of the fees that are taken in by the state are held in the state bank instead of being sent to Washington or a money center bank.  In a state bank, the money is held within the state.

All the banks in, say, North Dakota, are privately owned by investors and they are chartered by the state bank of North Dakota. Now, national banks also still do business in the state of North Dakota. Wells Fargo can be there, Bank of America can be there, but there are about seven state chartered banks that are privately owned by private investors. The other part of state banking is the correspondent bank relationship. Right now, when an independent bank has a loan that is too large for it to make, it goes to a money center bank or a bigger bank to partner in that loan with them. So those are the two things that a state bank does.

People tend to hear "state bank" and think it's a socialized system of banking with the state owning the bank that sits on Main Street but it isn't. It's very much the opposite of that and a very conservative approach to banking.

Daily Bell: There are numerous additional states that are investigating the possibility of state banks.  

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: Correct. The problem we have is too much centralized power in Washington, DC and a lot of states have figured that out. Right now, you have Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, Montana, Colorado, Illinois, Florida, Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts and a few others that are actively investigating the possibility of their own state bank. Let's go back to North Dakota, and look at the reasons why they did and the results they had and why other states are looking at state banks now.

North Dakota formed their state bank in 1919, 94 years ago. They have a tremendous history and a population of about 650,000 people. The North Dakota state bank, during the last 10 years, has paid the state treasurer more than $325 million from bank profits. In 2010, the worst economy in recent history, North Dakota had its largest budget surplus in the state's history. North Dakota tops the list of state economies year after year.

Now, state economies should be the number one concern of the people. State unemployment statistics are another issue and anyone who believes the stats that are being handed out right now are accurate is crazy. In Mesa County, where I live, the unemployment rate is 19.3%. In North Dakota, the unemployment rate is 3.3%. In 2009 and 2011 there were tax reductions in North Dakota. There are tremendous financial advantages to being a state bank and having a state bank and that is why all these states are looking into it.

Daily Bell: How does that differ from what Ellen Brown says?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: Ellen Brown is very positive about North Dakota and the state bank concept. Where Ellen and I differ is fractional-reserve banking. If you look at what Ellen has written about state banks, she talks in terms of the large increases in loans outstanding for the state bank. With fractional-reserve, when a bank makes a loan of a million dollars, they send 10% or $100,000 to the Federal Reserve and they can get a credit of up to $900,000 in new loans. That is what has created "debt capitalism," and they want to bring the whole debt capitalism concept to the state level. I am adamant that if a state bank is implemented, the charter that is passed by the people prevents that debt capitalism from happening.

Daily Bell: Define 'debt capitalism.' Did you coin this term?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: I started using this term a few years ago, but debt capitalism is where the emphasis for bank growth is placed on debt. Now, when I was a banker back in the '70s, we loaned our customers deposit-based loans. I think most people think that is still happening but that is not true with the fractional-reserve system that is in place today. In the past, we would loan up to 70% of our deposit base and we would be audited two or three times a year to make sure the quality of loans were good. In order for us to grow as a bank, or for any bank to grow in those days, the bank had to place emphasis on the growth of deposits. As you know, the only way you can grow deposits it to grow business, and that meant the bank had to be supportive of business growth within the community. If you do not have new jobs and new businesses, you are not going to have new business at the bank.

Today, a bank makes loans, gives 10% to the Federal Reserve and gets a credit to be able to loan 90% of the loan they just made to the public. So they are totally dependant on loans for growth, which has resulted in this entire debt mentality. In the old days it was always based on community business growth; new companies depositing and new employees depositing. Under the debt capitalism concept, which is not capitalism at all, in my view, everything is dependent on debt. It is how they create money out of thin air, and it depreciates the currency at the same time.

Daily Bell: If you have a state bank, do you have to have state currency?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: The answer is no. Obviously, you                                                                                                  do not. North Dakota has had a state bank for 94 years and they use Federal Reserve notes because right now, that is the law. They also have a relationship with the Federal Reserve, which is the law, and the FBIC, which is the law. But if the federal system failed tomorrow, the bank of North Dakota would be able to clear checks for all of its member banks and all of their customers. They would be able to do all of the things that the Federal Reserve System does. With the other 49 states, if the federal system fails, the banking system fails.See, if the federal system fails tomorrow, North Dakota could create its own system in a heartbeat because it has a distribution system in place with its state bank. The other 49 states do not have a distribution system.

And as far as declaring sovereignty, there are a few things that have to be in place before you can declare sovereignty. You have to have a defined territory; of course, a state has that. You have to have population and a state has that. But the other thing you have to have is control over your own financial system and if you do not have a state bank, you don't have that.

Daily Bell: Good foresight on North Dakota's part!  

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: I have to tell you, I do not consider the Federal Reserve System in this country to be a legitimate central bank. I am hoping some of these states get state banks implemented before Congress passes some legislation to prevent it. At the moment, states have sufficient sovereignty to say, 'Hey we're going to have our own state bank.' The Federal Reserve is a private corporation; it is not part of the government and it has no authority over the independent states of the United States.

There are several states that have legislatively declared the right to be sovereign, like Alabama, Nebraska, Rhode Island, Wyoming, Washington, Indiana, Kentucky, Georgia, Kansas, Missouri, Mississippi and Maryland. So this goes to my question: Does declaring themselves to be sovereign make them sovereign? No, because they don't have a state bank system in place they don't have control by international law, control of their own system. All I am saying is that state banks are critical to the sovereignty process or to the creation of a new currency.

So when North Dakota implemented their state bank six years after the Federal Reserve was implemented in 1913, Eastern bankers said 'That's a socialist system!' OK, look at it today and tell me which system is socialist. North Dakota just had a national meeting for all state treasurers around the United States in September, and the state treasurer of every state spent a full day becoming informed about the Bank of North Dakota.

Daily Bell: Give us some idea about the process each state will go through to have a state bank.

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: It's a very interesting political process, and it won't be pretty. What I have found out about the resolution I wrote for Colorado is that nothing is going to happen until after this election because the big banks will fund their opponents. They will put lots of money into negative advertising.

State banks, if they're going to happen in this country, are going to come about because of a public initiative, meaning people getting petitions signed, getting involved, learning more and so on. A state bank will turn an economy around within a year if it is properly managed and properly run. But it is a political hot potato so politicians who cannot afford to have the negative publicity during an election year are passing approvals to study state banks rather than actual legislation. Is that crazy or what?

Daily Bell: You sound frustated about the process. Why did you leave the banking business?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: There were endless changes that were not for the good. Basically, the Community Reinvestment Act that was passed in 1977 said bankers had to make mortgage loans to people who could not afford to repay them. if you didn't make the loans that the government said you should make, you would be penalized; you could be fined or they could deny you the right to expand or open a new branch. That bothered me.

Following this legislation came the low interest rates that Greenspan was putting in place. Suddenly the private bankers did not have time to make business purpose loans because suddenly everybody wanted to refinance their mortgage. That puzzled me greatly, I just watched what was going on and couldn't believe it. I thought, no government would do this kind of thing to its people if it wanted a healthy economy. It shocked me.

I wrote the first article about Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac back in 2003, called "Freddie Mac's Ethical Woes." You can see it at World Net Daily along with many other articles of mine. In July 2003, I wrote an article about Freddie Mac's problems. At that time, Freddie Mac was under investigation by the US Attorney's Office, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. 

All these changes encouraged me to begin writing my first book, which ended up becoming two fiction books. When the Swan's Neck Broke was the first one. I wrote the book in a fictional format to try to explain fractional reserve banking to the American people and explain the destructive nature of the central banking system. It discusses what was happening internationally and talked about all the corruption that was involved. It also goes into education and what has happened to the education system and why it's so dumbed down.

Swan's Neck Broke came out in 2008 and last year, in 2011, Flight of the Black Swan came out, which was a follow-up to the first one based on how do we recuperate, how do we take down all this corruption? I ended up realizing that what we have to do is a series of citizen grand juries, to identify the corruption and get rid of it. You will have to read the book to find out how that ends. It turned out really well.

Further to my books, I have continued to write several articles on how the Congress literally has gone through the various pieces of legislation that made it possible for this takeover of the American government. It's disgusting. (See If We Don't Learn from History, Part 1 of 2 and Part 2 of 2).

Daily Bell: How would you restructure the banking system in America?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: I would decentralize it, and I think that is the only way to do it. That is why I feel so strongly about state banks. State banks create decentralization of what is too much centralized power within the financial services industry in the United States.

Daily Bell: Would you further regulate Wall Street?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: Well, one of the first things I would do is eliminate the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. I would put Glass-Steagall back in place. There has always been a need for a strong, big wall in between commercial banking and stockbrokers. I do not care how much JP Morgan calls itself a bank – it's a stockbroker; it is not a bank. I understand they like calling themselves investment bankers because it gets them respect or whatever they think, but commercial banks and stockbrokers, are two different things. There is a natural conflict of interest built-in between the two, from which we were protected by the Glass-Steagall Act. We the consumers and we the commercial banking industry were protected from the moral hazard that results from that conflict of interest until they did away with the Glass-Steagall Act. That is the first thing we need to re-implement.

Whenever government wants more power it ignores the regulations that are in place, and then everything goes to hell. I do not believe in a lot of regulation but I do believe you have to have the proper structure in place to minimize the conflicts of interest involving greed and corruption. But regulations are not worth the paper they are written on if they are not enforced and adhered to. We have to make sure that the financial services industry is structured in a way that does not encourage fraud, corruption and greed.

Daily Bell: Where do we go from here? What needs to be done?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: I'll tell you what I think. In America, if we do not get state banks in place we are well over the cliff of economic disaster. I think the European Union is history. I believe Greece is going to default. The Federal Reserve System has totally devalued the American dollar and we can expect a depreciation of the dollar in the not too distant future. In my opinion, and no one has said this before, but I believe the state bank concept would work as well to solve the problems in Germany and France as it does in North Dakota. There's too much centralized banking power.

Daily Bell: Is there a power elite that wants to create one-world government?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall:  Absolutely. I think that has been the objective since the beginning. I believe that in order to get one-world government, they first had to have in place a world economy. Once they have all the world economic systems coordinated, it is child's play to flip into world government. I believe that has been the purpose. I also believe that economic failure internationally has been a planned failure and I believe the reason behind that planned failure is to create world government. The evolvement into technocrats and electronic money is horribly dangerous.

Daily Bell: What do you think of Austrian economists?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: I agree with a lot of what von Mises says but I disagree somewhat on the gold/silver standard because I believe we need commodities as a whole to back our currency. In other words, I believe gold, silver, natural gas, coal, timber, fishing, etc., all of the natural resources of any state, should be able to back a state currency, for example. In my opinion, all wealth comes from the earth.

Daily Bell: Is the Internet making a difference in terms of getting out your message?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: I have to say it is. You have to do a combination of public speaking and publishing to keep the message going. It's a very concerted effort.

Daily Bell: Do you have any other books in the works right now?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall:  Yes. I am currently working on a manuscript about one of the most intricate stories in the world right now. It will take some time to complete but it is about Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta who has been an intelligence operative since his teens and who reported directly to Ronald Reagan. This will be my final book of the trilogy, Swan Song for a Shadow Government, and should be finished in about a year. It will have a lot of biographical data and be more fact than fiction.

Daily Bell: Any other thoughts you would like to share?

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: One of the biggest things I have come to realize is that people's lack of knowledge, not just in the United States but people all over the world, as to how their own financial systems works is the reason that the powers-that-be have been able to perpetrate this rape of our financial resources, which is what it has been. It's a financial resource rape.

I also want to say that the reason I wrote my two books in fictional format, in an international, intrigue, intelligence, operative kind of book, is because it was the only way I could think of to get the attention of the American public. It's not a good situation. People need to learn more and do more.

My latest article about state banks can be seen here, "State Banks," with more at my blog, "State Banks: Resolution and Explanation."

Daily Bell: Thank you for your time, and your insights.

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall: Thank you. The Daily Bell is very respected among the financial people I speak with. Most of them read it and I am very pleased to have this opportunity to speak about state banks.

 


Good for Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall for stating the problem. There is a power elite intent on creating world government. Because of the Internet, they're moving very quickly now, trying to put in place a full spectrum of functioning, global facilities. These include the UN (the legislative arm), the IMF (the central bank),SDRs (world currency), the International Criminal Court (ICC), NATO (world army),Interpol (world police), etc. 

It's pretty amazing that people don't see global governance being erected around them, especially Westerners, and can still say that those who speak of it are "conspiracy theorists." There is a conspiracy, all right, but it's being implemented by a handful of impossibly wealthy individuals who have been pursuing this goal for at least a century, if not more. 

These individuals control central banks around the world (having installed them, apparently) and use their control of hundreds of trillions to generate what they call a New World Order. The way it's been set up is clever. The US dollar itself has been the lynchpin. The Saudi royal family, thoroughly intimidated, recognizes only dollars for oil. This means that other nations have to hold dollars in order to buy oil. Thus, the US central bank can print almost unlimited dollars, "exporting" its inflation and using the proceeds for whatever purposes the power elite chooses. Obviously, they choose to purchase a lot of military equipment. There's a reason that the US spends more on its military than all the rest of the world combined. It's the power elite's enforcement arm.

It's a kind of closed circle in which the rest of the world pays for its own enslavement. The tributes flowing to America are re-invested into military equipment. In turn, those at the top of the American power pyramid − the shadow government − continue to restrict discoveries of oil to ensure that oil is mostly produced by Third World countries that are easily controllable. There's plenty of oil in the world, in our view, but if the dollar-reserve system is going to work, the supply of oil (and its discoveries) needs to be restricted.

There are other aspects to this plan, as well. What has never really been emphasized, it would seem, even in the alternative media, is the extent to which the Anglosphere power elites have used fundamentalist Islam to set up further world tensions. Wahhabism is the Saudi Arabian version of fundamentalist Sunni Islam. It is consistently exported throughout the Middle East by the Saudis but it never seems to occur to Western observers that the Saudis do NOTHING (important) without the approval of Western elites. If these elites didn't want Wahhabism available, it wouldn't be.

We've also written articles, along with some other observers of the world scene, showing that the Iranian revolution and subsequent fundamentalist Shia resurgence was likely Western-backed. And finally, we've shown that the many wars that the US and NATO are now engaged in prosecuting in the Middle East are overthrowing secular regimes and putting in place Islamic ones, courtesy of the Western-linked Muslim Brotherhood.

Step by step, methodically, Western elites are building up a "clash of civilizations" that will obviously further expand the phony "war on terror" that has already done so much damage to people's freedoms. The clash of civilizations has another advantage in that controlled governments the world over are implementing Draconian passport and visa limitations using the justification of war to do so.

Take a step back and watch the pincer movement closing. On the one hand, you have the rising drumbeat of war and on the other you have additional economic dislocation. Taken together, the elites are creating a worldwide crisis that will apparently be used to further activate world government.

How can people respond? Well, in our humble view, people should do what they can to live independently, even to the point of having independent food sources and access to other resources (including perhaps gold and silver money) that are not directly linked to state facilities. We have regularly offered the solution that people should strive to live in small communities and have a say over the larger bureaucracy that is all too often running their lives. 

Ms. Barnewall believes that state banks (call them regional banks) are an important part of the solution, and generally the idea of devolution is a sensible one, in our view. Of course, we've taken it further than Ms. Barnewall (or Ellen Brown) in the sense that we advocate a fully laissez faire society in which various kinds of money and banking can compete with other forms of compensation and capital-raising techniques.

We are not even so sure that banking itself is a necessary or at least important part of free-market societies, in that historically speaking, people have raised capital in numerous ways. The current "cult of banking" is a direct outgrowth, in our view, of the power elite's desire to have distribution facilities to offer-out fiat/paper currency. Absent the current distribution system, the financial landscape would be much changed.

But we have tried to be consistent throughout the years we've been offering the Daily Bell, and long ago we began to state that solutions such as the ones offered by Brown and Barnewall might be better, at least in the short-term, than what we have today. In the longer term, we hope that Western societies find their way back to REAL free marketsfree banking and generally monetary freedom. It existed, partially anyway, in the US only several hundred years ago. There's no reason why it can't or won't exist again. People will look back on the current environment as a kind of bad dream − an interregnum, not a reign.

We are not sure, however, that the kinds of free-societies that we (along with many others) advocate will come about because people simply will them into existence. More and more, we are convinced that the current trends will have to play themselves out at least to some degree. For this reason, we do not advocate using the current system to CURE the current system, as more and more are arguing. 

In our view, people should try to DROP OUT of the current system to the best of their abilities. If enough people do this, the current system will simply lose credibility and eventually cease to exit. There is not much to recommend it at this point, after all, unless you are a fan of continuing wars, inflation, depression, unemployment, corporatism and expanding global government.

What we call the Internet Reformation is increasingly bringing this state of affairs to the attention of Western citizens, and as this knowledge grows, changes are taking place. We tend to feel this is as unstoppable as any other trend and that the end result of the current sociopolitical, economic and military environment will be one that includes devolution as well as centralization and expansion.

Ms. Barnewall, in our view, is doing her part for devolution and smaller society with her advocacy of state rather than federal banking, and also with her books and articles on these issues. There's much we disagree with, philosophically about the idea of public banking, even at a state level, and, of course, we are not convinced that the state can ever manage ANYTHING effectively because at root, when you speak of the state you are speaking of an entity that will mandate obedience using force.

But within a real-world locale, anything that punctures the ever-bigger goals of the power elite is probably a healthy occurance. Ms. Barnewall obviously appreciates the REAL problem and is not afraid of stating it. She receives our admiration for her guts and we certainly wish her well, generally, in her endeavors. These days, smaller is surely better in so many ways.

 

STATE BANKING

 

 

Planned US Internet Blackout On March 8 Raises Concerns

February 18th, 2012 by

 

 

http://www.eutimes.net/2012/02/planned-us-internet-blackout-on-march-8-raises-concerns/

Posted by EU Times

 

 

INTERNET

 

A disturbing Ministry of Trade report circulating in the Kremlin today is raising serious concerns over the United States plan to shut down significant parts of the Internet on 8 March in a move many Russian experts warn could be a prelude to massive attacks against the growing number of dissidents in that country.

According to this report, The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) will unplug on 8 March the Domain Name System (DNS) servers it set up to replace rogue DNS servers that sent victims to malicious sites. A report on Infoworld said the removal of this temporary fix may affect “a substantial number” of users, as half of Fortune 500 companies and US government agencies are infected with the malware, not to mention tens-of-millions of privately owned American computers.

The rogue DNS servers replaced by the FBI were seized this past November in Estonia following a two-year operation called “Ghost Click” where six Estonians working for Rove Digital were taken into custody by Estonian authorities in what is called the biggest cyber criminal takedown in history and the US is now hoping to extradite them; a Russian suspect said remains at large.

 

Those captured by the FBI and Estonian authorities used DNS Changer malware to redirect unsuspecting users to rogue servers that allowed them to manipulate users’ web activity. When users clicked on the link for the official iTunes website, for example, they were instead taken to a completely different website that purported to sell Apple software. These criminals, reports the FBI, are believed to have made at least $14 million from the scam.

Federal Security Services (FSB) addendums to this report note that even though FBI and Estonia authorities took claim for this cyber bust it was, in fact, Russian officials who supplied the critical information needed for bringing down this criminal ring after extracting a detailed confession from Russian Internet businessman Pavel Vrublevsky, and self-confessed MOSSAD agent, in late October, 2011, prior to his sentencing in a Moscow Court.

Vrublevsky was knowledgeable about the Estonian operation through his association with Rove Digital founder Vladimir Tsastsin who was a major investor in his company ChronoPay, a major Russian payment processing firm.

Upon forwarding their information to FBI and Estonian authorities about Rove Digital’s rogue servers, the FSB says in this report, Russian computer security experts sought to reverse the damage done to millions of computers around the world by manipulating the malware used which would have, in essence, neutralized the threat, but were overruled by the Americans who, instead, seized the servers a few days later and appropriated the malware for their “own uses.”

 

To why the US would not apply a rapid fix to the millions of computers affected by this malware as suggested by Russian experts, and, instead, replace the rogue servers with their own, and then turn around on 8 March and disconnect them all has left many in the Kremlin puzzled and concerned.

The greatest concern, this report says, is the “high potential” for the US to further infect computers without anyone realizing what they are doing so that on 8 March millions of Americans would discover they no longer had access to the Internet, and would not know why.

To effectively engineer an Internet blackout, while at the same time holding themselves blameless, the Ministry says, could be linked to any number of dissident suppression moves known to be being planned by the US which as of 9 February had already jailed at least 6,509 people protesting against the Obama regime.

Massive military movements within the United States, as we had previously reported on, are, also, continuing unabated as new reports this week detail US Marine assault exercises being carried out on their East Coast regions, a move made even more suspect after it was discovered that a sniper unit of this elite military force has begun using as its logo the dreaded Nazi SS symbol.

 

Equally concerning about the Americans planned 8 March Internet blackout is its coming two days after what is called Super Tuesday elections (6 March) for the Republican Party challenger to President Obama for the Presidency which would allow for massive voter manipulation by US authorities to “pick” who wins this most crucial race.

Important to note about this particular scenario, and as we had previously reported on in our 18 January report “Kissinger vows to China: “Jeb Bush Will Be Next President,” it was more than interesting to read this new US report that, in part, says:

“Al Cardenas, head of the American Conservative Union, has said that Republican turmoil might lead to a brokered convention in which Jeb Bush, former Florida governor, would emerge as a “possible alternative” party nominee. Mr. Cardenas, who is running this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), a gathering in Washington of some 10,000 conservatives, told MailOnline that it was not certain that one of the four current Republican candidates would emerge victorious.”

To what the final outcome of this planned 8 March shutdown of the Internet will be it is not in our knowing, other than to note that those who haven’t applied a “FIX” to their own computer systems yet should do so as soon as possible lest they find themselves blind.

 

INTERNET

 

 

Political Transformation in America: Effectuating Real Democracy by a Voter’s Rights Amendment

February 16th, 2012 by

 

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29246

 

By William Cox

 

Reversing the Supreme Court’s gift of constitutional rights to corporations in Citizens United will not cure the political ills weakening the sinews of democracy that bind the United States. The nation was infected at birth and it will continue to be diseased until its government is transformed into one that is responsive to the needs and ambitions of ordinary people, irrespective of wealth or influence.

Although Citizens United unleashed the overwhelming power of the wealthy elite, corporations, and other special interest groups to purchase the major benefits of government while avoiding the burden of taxation, the danger presented by the power of money has been a risk to democracy throughout American history.

Thomas Jefferson hoped that "we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, . . ." Almost two hundred years later, Franklin Roosevelt said, "We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob."

A number of organizations have attracted widespread bipartisan support in their efforts to overturn Citizens United. Even if they succeed in persuading Congress to enact an amendment depriving corporations of constitutional rights and if they convince three fourths of the states to ratify the amendment, the problems that existed the day before the decision was announced will remain and will continue to be as threatening as ever.

Legalized bribery in the form of campaign contributions will still influence the actions of elected officials; candidates will still avoid taking positions on critical issues and will ignore the concerns of voters; political parties will still enact policy "platforms" designed to attract voters and will ignore their promises once their candidates are elected, and voters will continue to be uninformed and turned off by elective politics.

If they are to ever achieve true representative democracy and the freedom and opportunity inherent in its promise, the People of the United States must transform their government, rather than to reform or restore it back to something which will not serve or protect their best interests.

 

Public Policy

 

The essence of politics is the formulation of policy, and the manner and means by which public policy is made and effectuated by laws and regulations defines the very nature of government.
The effectiveness of a democracy can be measured by the degree that its voters have an influence in the development and articulation of government policy, either directly or through their elected representatives. Conversely, curtailment of that power results in an oligarchy or plutocracy, rather than a democracy.

The Existing Public Policy System.

Presently, political parties and candidates identify their concept of the issues confronting the offices sought, and they present their policies regarding the various issues. Citizens then cast their votes for the candidates they hope are best prepared to solve the problems they consider to be the most serious.

The current process presents a number of problems. Left to their own devices, politicians ignore the most critical issues and concentrate their resources and rhetoric on personalities and negative campaigning designed to lower the estimation of their opponents in the eyes of the voters. In addition, candidates studiously avoid taking any position on the real issues they will face, believing they will lose rather than gain votes by taking a stand.

Specifically, during presidential elections, the political parties construct "platforms" defining their proposed policies on the issues. These artfully drawn platforms are designed to appeal to the maximum number of voters, while retaining a sufficient degree of ambiguity to avoid all accountability in the future.

If the presidential platform was a blueprint for the construction of a residence, the house would be unattractive, unsafe, and uninhabitable. Even so, American voters continue to attend the open houses held by slick political salesmen, and more often than not they are forced to buy the lesser of two evils, with the ever diminishing hope that their purchase will actually live up to its promises.

The Politics of Wealth.

The development of meaningful public policy also suffers because the two main political parties have become virtually indistinguishable. They primarily rely on the same corporations, financial institutions and wealthy elite for major campaign financing, and consequently, irrespective of their "platforms," they both remain beholden to the same narrow constituency and its special interests, rather than the health and welfare of those who cast the ballots.

David and Charles Koch hosted a billionaire summit conference in the last week of January at a golf resort in Southern California to plot strategy and raise money for the 2012 elections. This was not the first time the wealthy elite has united to make and control the U.S. political agenda, nor will it be the last.

America’s plutocracy did not suddenly pop into existence from another dimension. It is the dividend returned on a massive investment over the past 40 years by family foundations, such as those established by Lynde and Harry Bradley, John Olin, Sarah Scaife and Smith Richardson, and by individuals including Bunker and Nelson Hunt, Joseph Coors, Richard Mellon Scaife, and the Koch Brothers.

The centers, institutes, and foundations endowed and supported by corporations and the wealthy elite have come to very effectively formulate and market their agenda of privilege for every branch of the government. Burton Pines of the Heritage Foundation unabashedly said, "Our targets are the policymakers and opinion-making elite. Not the public."

One of the most effective of these groups has been the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, which has successfully staffed a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court with its members. They have produced a series of decisions, including Citizens United, in collaboration with their wealthy and corporate sponsors in the class war being waged against the American people.
Special interest pressure on government does not come only from the right. The labor movement has made significant contributions of money and volunteers to the Democratic Party in the past, but the decline of labor unions over the past 30 years has reduced the influence of organized labor over the Democratic "platform."

The Democratic Party has historically represented the interests of workers and the poor; however, both sitting and former members of the party now peddle their allegiance to corporations and the wealthy elite. The newsletter, First Street, recently published its top-ten list of Washington lobbyists. The top four were all former senators and congressmen from the Democratic Party.
Similarly, the Republican Party and the "Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America" no longer represent the needs and aspirations of the millions of small business owners in the United States. Two thirds of small business owners revealed in a recent poll that they have been hurt by Citizens United, and 88% viewed money as playing a negative role in politics.

Lobbyists.

The revolving door between the Capitol Building and K Street provides access to both sides of the aisle. Currently, there are 285 former members registered as congressional lobbyists, with many others, including Newt Gingrich, offering "strategic advice" or public relation services to corporate and special interest clients.

There are tens of thousands of registered lobbyists in Washington, D.C. representing thousands of corporations, trade associations and interest groups. These individuals will not be laid off or made redundant by a reversal of Citizens United.

Lobbyists have been working the corridors of power throughout the history of the United States, and they will continue to cut the line in front of ordinary people, as long as they are allowed to get away with it.

What then can be done to transform the government to one which provides the voters, of every political persuasion, with a stronger voice in the formulation of policy?

 

A National Policy Referendum

 

The concept of "policy" is widely misunderstood. Policy is simply a guideline or a path to a goal or objective. It differs from laws, rules and regulations, which are mandatory.
Moreover, a policy referendum differs substantially from the initiatives and propositions that voters often find on their state and local ballots. A policy referendum does not make law; it creates policy.

Through their answers to a series of referendum questions, voters can effectively establish policy guidelines to be followed and implemented by those they elect. If an elected official fails to follow the people’s policy, then he or she has to be prepared to justify the deviation at the next election.

Consequences.

A National Policy Referendum can produce a number of positive results:

First, the grassroots (and netroots) movement that compels the enactment of a referendum, whether by constitutional amendment or by congressional action will, in and of itself, transform the government. Once true representative democracy is effectuated, government will never again be the same.

Second, the referendum process will result in a transformation of apathetic voters of every political persuasion into a more engaged, informed and motivated electorate. Once the power to create policy is realized by voters, they will naturally become more questioning and inquisitive. Moreover, they will likely insist on civics classes in public schools to better prepare young people to evaluate and resist political propaganda and negative advertising in the future.

Third, Congress will be compelled to identify actual problems, rather than the profit-motivated issues promoted by their corporate sponsors in the military-industrial complex and the health care, financial, and petroleum industries.

In a representative democracy, it will necessarily be the responsibility of Congress to decide upon the most critical issues facing the nation during presidential elections; however, the Internet Age provides myriad opportunities for public participation in the process and for political parties to promote competing questions.

Fourth, candidates for all elective offices, particularly presidential candidates, will be forced to take a public stand on a range of real problems. Undoubtedly, politicians will try to lie and dissemble about their positions on issues, but much like witnesses under cross-examination in a court case, they can be forced to simply answer yes or no to the most important questions.

Finally, referendum voters will be much more inclined to study the issues, to confront their own prejudices and to challenge the positions of others before arriving at well-thought-out conclusions. Thoughtful answers to a policy referendum at the conclusion of an educational process are far more instructive and useful than quick answers offered during surprise opinion polls.

Irrespective of their intelligence, level of education, or station in life, ordinary people are legally required to file income tax returns each year, as the government dips into their pockets to fund its operations and to pay the salaries of their representatives. If people are smart enough to pay taxes and brave enough to die in the wars started by their government, they also possess the ability to decide public policy.

The collective wisdom of motivated and well-informed voters in a free society is a powerful force that will better protect its members against oppression by their own government and the people of other countries from the wars started for the financial benefit of corporate sponsors.

 

The People’s Government

 

The sanctity of elections in a representative democracy is directly dependent upon the strength of voter turnouts, which in turn depends on the trust of voters that their vote will make a difference, and by the integrity of the ballot box, which insures that all valid votes are properly counted.

Voter Participation.

In the United States, voter turnouts are historically much lower than in most other established democracies, and they have been steadily decreasing since peaking at 65% in 1960. The low point was reached in 1988 when barely half of the eligible voters appeared at the polls. Since then, the turnout has bounced up and down depending upon ballot issues, the closeness of the election and whether voters felt their lives would be affected or changed by the result.

Even within the vagaries of turnouts, percentages are closely correlated with income, with 86% of people earning more than $75,000 voting, as compared to 52% of those with incomes of less than $15,000. Unsurprisingly, legislators are far more responsive to the issues that concern high-income voters.

The best way to eliminate or minimize these disparities in participation is to hold elections on a national paid voting holiday to celebrate the federal elections held every two years and to honor the voters, who are the most important element of a democracy.

A measure of the character of a person should not be which party, candidate or cause he or she supports, but whether or not the person actively participates in their government by casting a wise vote. Effective voting must become a sacrament in the nation’s political religion.

Voter Suppression.

Fair elections are best guaranteed by large turnouts; however, increasingly, there are political strategies that seek to subvert the process by actively suppressing voter turnout by those of opposing viewpoints.

Rather than encouraging voters to support their position or candidate, campaigns engage in voter suppression efforts to discourage whole classes of people from exercising their right to vote.
Suppression can operate indirectly through legislative processes, such as enacting unreasonable photo identification laws making it more difficult or expensive for low income, minority or elderly voters to register or to cast ballots, or by directly intimidating voters by threatening challenges at the polling place.

Voter suppression can also take the form of mailings or telephone calls directing voters to the wrong polling place, by intentionally misleading voters about voting requirements, or by providing too few polling places in opposition precincts.

Legislative restrictions on registration or voting must balance the benefits of an increased voter turnout with the risk of voting fraud, and all forms of intentional voter suppression should be prohibited.

Computerized Voting.

It might appear on the surface that computerized voting could supply a modern and secure method of voting; however, evidence of its vulnerabilities continues to accumulate.

In addition to the facts that voting machines are manufactured and marketed by political partisans who refuse to disclose their operating codes, that the computers can be and have been easily hacked, and that voting machines are mechanically and electronically unreliable and often break down during elections, they do not produce an auditable paper ballot completed and verified by the voter.

Paper Ballots.

If American voters are to regain and retain control over their elections, they must refuse to use computerized voting machines or any other electronic ballot. Instead, voters must insist on hand-countable paper ballots upon which to record their choices.

Even still, paper ballots can be optically scanned and quickly counted, but most importantly, each ballot is, indisputably, evidence of an individual’s vote and, collectively, paper ballots serve as a tangible symbol of democracy in action.

Write-in Voting.

Once in the voting booth, instead of responding like laboratory animals pushing a button in response to the stimulus of the latest ten-second television attack ad, voters should take time to carefully consider the issues and candidates presented on their ballots by the various political parties.

Once a decision is reached, each voter should have the choice of demonstrating his or her literacy and inherent political power by voting on the most critical issues and by clearly writing in his or her personal choice for president of the United States, whether or not the name is printed on the ballot.

So what if it takes a little longer to count, or recount, the ballots? Isn’t delayed gratification a small price to pay for ensuring that voters control elections, rather than those who profit from elections?

If voter turnouts were to dramatically increase, and if only 15 to 25 percent of voters were to cast write-in votes, trust that the politicians would quickly register their willingness to accept every write-in vote naming them for any office of public trust and that they will be scrambling to ensure that all write-in votes cast for them are legally counted.

The Future.

Young Americans continue to be grievously wounded and killed in their nation’s wars to defend a "government of the people, by the people and for the people." The question that must be answered now is what kind of government will these young people have in the future?

Will it be a despotic government enabled by lazy and easily misled voters, who foolishly rely on robots to count their ballots?

More likely, the People of the United States, of every political party, will prove once again they are smart enough to figure out they are being taken advantage of, and they will have the courage to do something about it. They just need to figure out what that "something" is.

 

A Voters’ Rights Amendment

 

Since its creation two hundred years ago, the People of the United States have traveled a long path toward achieving true representative democracy. Initially, only male property owners were allowed to cast ballots, but along the way the franchise has been extended, with a few exceptions, to all adult citizens.

With its decision in Citizens United, the Supreme Court not only reversed two hundred years of progress toward a democracy for all of the people, it slammed the door shut and handed over the keys to corporations and other moneyed interests.

Amending the Constitution.

There has been a groundswell of bipartisan opposition to Citizens United, and a number of organizations representing tens of thousands of voters have proposed constitutional amendments to overcome the decision.

Move to Amend is the best known and best organized of the opposition groups, and its proposed amendment aims to reverse the granting of corporate personhood and the equation of money and free speech ordered by the Court. Its proposal follows in the first three sections:

 

Section 1

The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only.

Artificial entities, such as corporations, limited liability companies, and other entities, established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law.

The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the People, through Federal, State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.

Section 2

Federal, State and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own contributions and expenditures, for the purpose of influencing in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.

Federal, State and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed.
The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the First Amendment.

Section 3

Nothing contained in this amendment shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.

The V.R.A.

A Voters’ Rights Amendment securing voter control over the government must not only reverse corporate personhood and provide for the control of money in politics, it must also clearly establish voter primacy as a matter of inherent constitutional right and it must include a solid foundation upon which to build a true and long-lasting representative democracy for future generations. Following is a working blueprint for such a structure:

 

Section 4

The right of all citizens of the United States to cast effective votes in all elections is inherent under this Constitution and shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State.

Section 5

During the calendar year preceding a presidential election, Congress shall solicit public comment regarding the political issues that most concern the People.
Prior to the end of the calendar year preceding a presidential election, Congress shall adopt a joint resolution enumerating the 12 most critical policy questions that should be addressed by the next President and Congress.

Failure of Congress to adopt a joint resolution prior to the end of the calendar year shall result in the disqualification of all sitting members of Congress to be eligible for reelection.

Section 6

Federal elections conducted every second year for Senators and Representatives shall be held on a national voter’s holiday, with full pay for all citizens who cast a ballot.
Federal elections shall be conducted on uniform, hand-countable paper ballots and, for the presidential election, ballots shall include the 12 most critical policy questions identified by Congress, each to be answered yes or no by the voters.

Paper ballots shall provide space allowing voters to handwrite in their choice for all elective federal offices, if they choose, and all such votes shall be counted.

Section 7

In balancing the public benefit of maximum voter participation with the prevention of voting fraud, Congress and the States shall not impose any unreasonable restriction on registration or voting by the People.

The intentional suppression of voting is hereby prohibited and, in addition to any other penalty imposed by law, any person convicted of the intentional suppression of voting shall be ineligible for public office for a period of five years.

 

Transformation

 

The United States Constitution once stood as a model for new nations; however, today it is viewed by many as an outdated and difficult-to-amend document that guarantees few rights, when compared to other established democracies.

There is an inherent right in a representative democracy to cast an effective vote, and a failure by the government to protect that right nullifies the electoral process.
By amending their constitution to ensure the primacy of voters and their right to control their government, the People of the United States will once again demonstrate an evolutionary model for democratic governments around the world.

Transformation of the United States government to a true representative democracy is no longer an option. It is a matter of survival!

William John Cox is a retired police officer, prosecutor, public interest lawyer, author and political activist. He wrote the Policy Manual of the Los Angeles Police Department defining the principles and philosophy of policing, and he wrote the role of the police in America for President Nixon’s National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals. His efforts to promote a peaceful political evolution can be found at VotersEvolt.com, his writings are collected at WilliamJohnCox.com and he can be contacted at u2cox@msn.com.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

 

This is a great example of how an organization can spread food and poison at the same time. While I find many articles at Global research very informative, I have always known they are a socialist organization, and need to be watched carefully. Don’t let them fool you with their many great articles, but keep abreast of how they also spread destruction. Sorting out truth from lies is sometimes hard to do, if you don’t really understand what their goal is. So, as I have said many times, eat the meat and throw out the rest. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding on what to have for dinner, and without the interference of the central bankers, a Republic is for a freedom loving Nation. This article sounds great to the ignorant Liberals among us, but would totally destroy America forever.

 

DECEPTION

 

Would you re-elect Obama?

February 15th, 2012 by

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/100000-line-up-to-back-sheriff-joe/

Take our survey and let us know. Rewards after just ten surveys! yougov.com

 

Officials with Grassfire Nation, a key coordinating group for tea-party-type activities and issues, say the Department of Justice’s investigation of Maricopa, Ariz., County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is nothing more than a political attack.

And to offer encouragement to the sheriff, Darla Dawald, representing the Grassfire Nation group, has presented Arpaio with a petition of some 100,000 signatures from people who have declared their support for the law-enforcement officer.

Grassfire Nation supports the Patriot Action Network, which calls itself the “nation’s largest conservative social action network, involving tens of thousands of citizens,” including many tea party members.

The petition demands DOJ prove its accusations that Arpaio’s office has engaged in a policy to systematically violate the civil rights of Hispanics, which WND has reported DOJ refuses to do.

The petition claims the DOJ investigation is nothing more than a baseless, politically motivated attack on Arpaio.

“Citizens belonging to this grass roots movement who called themselves ‘Grassroots Nation’ have followed the situation and say they feel the federal government has orchestrated an attack on the Sheriff for Obama’s political gain, who hopes to ingratiate himself to the Hispanic American voting block,” the petition read.

The petition’s “Statement of Support” says:

“As a Citizen of the United States, I am declaring my support for Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the sheriff’s lawful practices in prosecuting criminal and his unflinching stand in handling the illegal immigration crisis in his home state of Arizona. I demand that the U.S. Department of Justice release any evidence involving the allegations against Sheriff Joe and his department’s practices. If proven unfounded, I demand an immediate end to the politically motivated witch-hunt against the sheriff and his department, and a public apology from Attorney General Holder.”

At the time, Arpaio noted that not only does he enforce the law, he also has his Cold Case Posse investigating Barack Obama’s birth certificate and eligibility.

Arpaio has scheduled a news conference March 1 in Phoenix to release the findings of the Cold Case Posse that has been investigating Obama’s eligibility.
 

Discover what the Constitution’s reference to “natural born citizen” means and whether Barack Obama qualifies, in the ebook version of “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”

Arpaio’s decision to investigate Obama follows a meeting held in his office Aug. 17, 2011, with tea party representatives from Surprise, Ariz., who presented a petition signed by more than 250 Maricopa County residents. The petitioners expressed concern that their voting rights could be irreparably compromised if Obama uses a forged birth certificate to be placed on the 2012 presidential ballot in Arizona or otherwise is found to be ineligible.

WND previously reported that the tea party letter formally stated the following charge: “The Surprise Tea Party is concerned that no law enforcement agency or other duly constituted government agency has conducted an investigation into the Obama birth certificate to determine if it is in fact an authentic copy of 1961 birth records on file for Barack Obama at the Hawaii Department of Health in Honolulu, or whether it, or they are forgeries.”

The posse, constituted under the authority of Arpaio’s office, consists of three former law enforcement officers and two retired attorneys with law enforcement experience. It has been examining evidence since September concerning Obama’s eligibility to be president under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution.

The Cold Case Posse conducting the investigation has been described as a “posse within the posse,” consisting of volunteers with professional experience in conducting investigations. It includes individuals chosen because of their professional backgrounds in law enforcement, lawyers who have participated in criminal or civil cases and individuals with specialized skills in fields ranging from accounting to conducting criminal forensic examination.

The posse was constituted as a 501(c)3 organization, designed to cost the people of Maricopa County nothing, while enabling people from around the country to contribute to its mission.

In total, more than 3,000 volunteers participate in Arpaio’s posse program. The power to constitute posses is authorized to Arizona sheriffs under the state constitution.

Regarding the Department of Justice Investigation, Arpaio has told WND the issue raised by the DOJ is the sheriff’s office treatment of Hispanics. The DOJ alleges there are systematic violations of Hispanics’ federal civil rights.

However, Arpaio’s repeated requests for documentation have not generated a response.

Arpaio told Dewald that he is just doing his job.

“I serve the four million people who live in this county,” he said.

Dewald said the signatures actually represent voices of Americans “who have made a commitment to stand with Sheriff Joe and his policies to protect this great state and the nation.”

Arpaio has contended that a 22-page complaint the DOJ released Dec. 15 is nothing more than anecdotal and did not prove systematic sheriff’s department policies aimed at depriving Hispanics of their civil rights.

Nor was Arpaio concerned that the DOJ might take him and his sheriff’s office to federal court immediately, as it has threatened.

The DOJ has threatened that if Arpaio “wants to debate the facts instead of fixing the problems stated in our findings, we will do so by way of litigation.”

PATRIOT ACTION

United States Congress, the people’s servants, or the people’s enemy? You decide!

February 14th, 2012 by

 

IS IT REALLY REAL?­THE INDEFENSIBLE IS FACTUALLY INDEFENSIBLE! 
 

February 13, 2012
By Joe McCutchen

 

The Democrat party is the party of welfare, the Republican Party, the party of war.  The Republican Party hides behind the veil of small government and individual rights…nothing could be further from the truth. Observe! 
21 A-10 jet fighters based in Fort Smith vs. 30,000 Drones nationally…who do you think will win? 

Let the American ship of state weigh anchor for a moment.  During the George W. Bush administration, aside from his murdering and lying, the following police-state parcels were passed by a feckless & corrupt congress, e.g.:  The Patriot Act (rendition/torture, indefinite detainment, search & seizure without warrants) , the Military Commissions Act (violation of Posse Commitatus), the Homegrown Terrorism Act (now dissenting American citizens can be targeted), (Republican senators Graham & McCain have declared our Homeland is part of the battleground! Let that sink in!) and suddenly under the Marxist-Communist Barack Obama, the National Defense Authorization Act (enhanced interrogation <torture>, assassination, indefinite detainment of Americans arrested without legal representation or trial, either in the U.S. or to foreign soil), the SIP (Strategic Implementation Plan) act…against domestic “extremism” (want to take a crack at what government calls extremism?), and now HR 658 & the 30,000 DRONES!

Republicans have been the progenitors of all the recent unconstitutional heinous acts justified by the false flag advertised as the War on Terrorism. Both Democrat & Republican Parties have kept us mired in the Mid-East for 21 years.  Can you imagine the real cost in lives & treasure on all sides…and to what end? The same psychopathic Warmongers, along with non-thinking emotional American citizens are rattling their sabers to attack Iran.  Remember what the Founders admonished, you give up a little freedom for a little security and you lose both.  Citizens, if you believe the legislation listed above is designed to make you safer you have been watching too much O’Reilly & Hannity and other Fox sycophants…the one exception Judge Andrew Napolitano (whose program was just cancelled).

Before dissecting the very latest attack on Americans designed to remove all vestiges of privacy & freedom, compliments of the U.S. Congress, a quick look at the Arkansas Six:
1.    Senator John (“Travelin’ Man) Boozman…never saw a war he didn’t like, from afar of course, and willing volunteer lapdog for the global army–NATO.  Boozman voted for ALL of the above and voted a second time to re-up the Patriot Act.
2.    Senator Mark Pryor (hopefully the last of the 50 year political dynasty with 0 constitutional accomplishments)…. voted for all the above.
3.    Cong. Mike Ross…voted for all the above…and special credit to Ross for casting the vote to get Obamacare out of committee so it could be passed, and yes, he was rewarded $275,000 for his vote.
4.    The three lesser lights are Cong. Steve Womack, Timothy Griffin, & Rick Crawford.  In a constituent letter Griffin lied about the real purpose of the NDAA.  Womack is a big government man (both civilian & military), participant and supportive, and bragged about voting to re-up the Patriot Act, while endeavoring to impose sales tax on internet purchases. All six voted to give Obama $2.4 Trillion in Aug. 2011 & $1.4 Trillion in Jan. 2012, bringing the reported national debt to a frightening $16.4 Trillion !….they cynically call these numbers a “debt ceiling”, all 3 voted for the above congressional acts.  Boozman & Womack are the two to be feared most.
 HR 658 locks the corral gate of freedom and installs without equivocation an American Police State.  HR 658 calls for 30,000 Drones to overfly the United States for surveillance purposes (no, not for American safety), compliments of the U.S. Congress, at a cost of $63.4 billion presently. The Drones will remove any vestiges of privacy.  The source of the billions?  Since 911 there has been only 1 incident, both point to “false flags”. 

Substantial evidence suggests that 911 was an inside job performed by rogue elements of government and was quite possibly assisted by another country. The Anthrax incident had its beginning at Fort Detrick, Md. the army’s laboratory for the creation of the most sinister compounds known to man. As far back as the 50’s the then Camp Detrick Maryland was turning out compounds that were and are an affront to civilization.

The 30,000 Drones would factor out to 600 Drones per state, (you can forget the friendly skies) capable of being airborne for 50 hours. The attack on personal liberty and privacy by the federal government, accompanied by a lack of national reporting by the various mainstream news media are nothing more than accomplices for murder and civil unrest.  If you are influenced by the blathering’s of O’Reilly or Hannity you have no comprehension of the geo-political circumstance and the guaranteed blowback. With media’s failure to report truthful in-depth news, they are simply acting as a cadre of assassins. Media America has assumed the position of the Vichy government of France during WW II­criminal collaboration.

A note to citizens, and specifically the leaders of Fort Smith, AR., who do you believe to have the “winning hand”….21 A-10’s or 30,000 Drones? Madam Editor of the Times Record appears to have a disconnect with reality or she’s incredibly naïve, e.g. in a country of 300 million does she really believe a few hundred emails & faxes are going to influence the Department of Army/Department of Defense? The “mission” of the 188th is bandied around, so what is the 188th mission and is it possible the A-10’s have outlived their usefulness?
As has been stated on multiple occasions, the Arkansas Six, but not limited to, are Traitors to the good citizens of Arkansas and all Americans. Their lust for power has blinded and destroyed rational objectivity.

Most of these liberty stealing acts are being driven by Republicans and this is meant in no way to give the Democrats a pass.

Americans, both parties are criminally corrupt to the core, and as citizens continue to vote with a pragmatist mentality (the lesser of the two evils) we will surely go down in flames in the near term.
As a side note, if Gingrich, Romney, or Santorum were in power they would attack Iran today.  The 3 are pathological fools.  This certainly does not mean support for Obama.
 
Joe McCutchen
Fort Smith
 
www.arkansasfreedom.com  
 

CORRUPTION

Dependence on foreign oil and other oil industry hoaxes and scams

February 13th, 2012 by

http://ppjg.me/2012/02/12/dependence-on-foreign-oil-and-other-oil-industry-hoaxes-and-scams/

February 12, 2012 by ppjg

 

ENERGY

 Marti Oakley (c) copyright 2012

While we struggle as a nation to stay on our feet despite the mismanagement of our national debt and the number of people sliding into poverty as a result of fascism, one of the greatest scams of all times has unfolded right before our very eyes.  This scam only slightly more disgusting than the global warming/climate change/man-made climate change, or whatever the current and ever changing buzzword is this week to describe “weather”patterns.  Now we have “dependence on foreign oil”….Yep! That’s the one!

 One of the greatest all-time scams perpetrated by the oil cartels and our government is the idea that we do not produce enough gas and oil products to make us energy independent.  The fact is, we do and we always have.

According to various reports, the export of fuel in 2011 from U.S. refiners topped the markets at 117 million gallons per day of gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and other petroleum products, up from 40 million gallons per day a decade earlier.  For the first time in our history gas and oil EXPORTS were the top of the export list although they have been in the top ten exports for years!

Wait a minute!  I thought we needed to drill more!  I thought we didn’t have enough gas and oil produced domestically for us to be independent from foreign oil imports!  But we got 117 million gallons of refined fuels to ship out to other countries every single day of the week?  365 days a year? 

Gasoline supplies are being exported to the highest bidder, says Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at Oil Price Information Service. “It’s a world market,” he says.

This just begs so many questions.  How could we possibly be dependent on foreign oil if we can ship 117 million gallons a day out of the country, never to return, of products the public thinks is in short supply right here at home?

If we are importing back into the country, 98 million gallons less per year, than we shipped out…..who is actually dependent on whom for these products?

And finally:  What is the point in shipping out products supposedly in short supply here at home and simultaneously shipping the same products back into the US but those products now produced in other countries which is now costing us more money?

Still think we need to frack, drill and contaminate groundwater supplies to produce energy?   Do you still think there will be no gas at the pump if we don’t allow BP back into the Gulf to do more damage?

Only a small portion of the gas and oil produced here in the US, stays in the US.  The bulk of crude is delivered to the global markets as per our agreement with OPEC. Whatever is produced here must be delivered to that market so that oil producers do not step on any OPEC toes and so that OPEC does not dump the failing US dollar. All OPEC production is done using the dollar. It is then bid on by other countries in that market including us.  Do not confuse crude production with refined oil and gas products.

In the first ten months of 2011, US refiners exported 848 million barrels (worth $73.4 billion) of refined fuels (not crude) and imported 750 million barrels of the same products from OPEC.  That means that we sent out 98 million gallons MORE than what we brought back in.

We are NOT dependent on foreign oil!  We are being played by the oil cartels and our own government.  As long as they can keep the public convinced that we don’t produce enough to meet our energy needs, we will continue to accept high fuel prices while we get gouged really good. The domestic supply is shorted so that the reserves we should have on hand for energy security and independence are diminished.  This translates into artificially inflated market prices based on a massive and ongoing deception. You pay for that.

Another part of this scam is the constant hand wringing regarding our “aging refineries” and the fact that we have built no new refineries for more than twenty years.  I’m guessing we don’t need any new refineries if we are refining so much oil right now that we can ship 117 million barrels of refined products out of the country each day while still contributing to US demands.  But here again:  If we can, with our aging refineries manage to ship out more refined products than the country needs, apparently the refineries we have are humming right along.

While we are hammered incessantly with TV ads and government reports stating that unless we allow oil cartels to frack us into oblivion by drilling far underground (even under your home, schools, hospitals, and into watersheds) we will continue to be dependent on foreign imports of natural gas.  Yet no one wants to talk about the Ruby pipeline that cuts across the Northern plains states that will end up being pumped into tankers headed for Asian markets (China).  Most folks think if we allow fracking to continue or expand, that somehow all that natural gas will end up in their furnace and the cost will go down when in fact, the more they frack the higher your bill is because exports will increase while imports of natural gas back into the country will also increase.

The increased release of massive amounts of methane gas driven out of the ground should not be a cause for concern as the EPA has a handle on that.  According to them, it isn’t fracking or drilling that causes the increase in methane…its cow farts.  Yes! That’s right folks!  The EPA is dead serious about the hazards of cow emissions.

How ‘bout that Keystone pipeline?  Why! It will create thousands of jobs…….and reduce our dependence on imported oil.  Well, sure it will.  The Keystone pipeline has not one thing to do with making us energy independent.  All, and I mean ALL that pipeline produces will be shipped out as quickly as they can get the pipeline flowing.  This pipeline isn’t going to help make us energy independent and it isn’t going to reduce consumer prices nor will it increase reserves.  But, we will be left with the massive damage to the environment, contaminated water supplies and air quality.

As for the damage?  Not to worry, EPA has that covered too.  Oil and gas companies are exempted totally from compliance with the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act and from any environmental impact studies and cannot be prosecuted for the damage they do.

 

Now……don’t you feel better?

ENERGY

MAJOR NEW WEAPON IN THE FIGHT AGAINST THE U. N.

February 8th, 2012 by

 

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom209.htm

 

by Tom DeWeese
January 8, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Immediate Action Needed To Drive Home A Victory

Those who are working to enforce Agenda21 operate from a three-pronged attack; Social Justice, which dictates that community needs take precedent over individual wants; Public/Private Partnerships, a dangerous melding of private corporations with government resulting in government-sanctioned monopolies; and Environmental control, which translates into the proposition that all actions by man lead to environmental Armageddon and therefore must be tightly regulated by a central force of power.

One major target in the crosshairs of this attack is private property ownership and control by individuals. Across the nation reports are pouring in of government land grabs that lock away private land in the name of protecting a sucker fish, or a spotted owl, or a historic site. The results are destroyed industries such as timber, ranching or mining. Valuable and desperately needed natural resources are put out of reach for use.

Much closer to the average homeowner, property rights are being violated as restrictions are put on a homeowner’s ability to add on to the house or make improvements. In some extreme cases, access roads to houses are disallowed; even normal repairs are interpreted as new building and are banned. There are new building restrictions that dictate the kinds of materials that may be used for building and repairs. Now private homes are being invaded by electric companies, replacing, without permission, electric meters to comply with new regulations. Homeowners are losing their ability to even control their own thermostat.

In some communities, to meet arbitrary energy restrictions, local government is forcing homeowners to install new energy efficient appliances and windows,and even new roofs, on occasion. There are reports of inspectors actually entering homes and systematically removing incandescent light bulbs and replacing them with the new green models, without the knowledge and against the will of the property owner. Repairmen are instructed to lower temperatures on water heaters as they repair them, and so forth.

In short, private property rights, meaning the control of property by the owner is fast disappearing. While Agenda 21/Sustainable Development-inspired legislation gives lip-service to private property ownership, the language usually says something like, balance the rights of individuals and property owners with the needs of the community. That line is, in fact, a direct quote from the Growth Policy for Great Falls, Montana. Such wording is nearly universal in comprehensive development plans across the nation.

That mindset is growing in local government regulations as Agenda 21 practices are enforced. The promoters understand that their policies are literally ripping apart private ownership of property, but they lack the intestinal fortitude to be honest about their actions. So they acknowledge property rights, and hope we don’t question how private control of ones own property is balanced with the needs of the community. How is that done? Who stands for the rights of the individual property owner or private business as government makes the rules to decide the needs of the community.

To defend such a policy, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) and planning professionals such as the American Planning Association (APA) which contract with local governments to create such rules, come armed with an arsenal of experts ready to defend the anti-property rights policies whenever challenged. So, if a property owner appears before the County Commissioners to complain that a certain regulation has damaged his property rights, or perhaps has damaged his ability to conduct business, for example, the NGOs immediately jump into action to defend the policy. They bring in a battery of experts with officials titles to write official sounding reports that serve to overwhelm the elected officials and cut off any honest debate. A local citizen simply has no chance to fight back against this heavily-funded, powerfully-connected onslaught.

Obviously, if Agenda 21 and its mindset of government control is to be reigned in, clearly, something needs to be done to provide a strong voice for protection and defense of the property owners. Such a plan of action has now been developed by County Commissioner Cornel Rasor of Bonner County, Idaho. He calls it a Property Rights Council.

Rasor, Chairman of his County Commission, has been an opponent of Agenda 21 and a proponent of property rights for many years. After being elected to the County Commission several years ago he recognized the threat centralized control of development posed to private property and set out to develop a strategy to protect constituents’ property rights and their right to control their own property. As a result, the concept he created is a Property Rights Council (PRC) as an official arm of the county government. It now exists in Bonner County, complete with a full time director on the County payroll.

Key to the success of a Property Rights Council is the proper definition of property rights. Scott Bauer, county attorney for Bonner County, Idaho and one of the driving forces to get it established, explained their approach in defining property rights this way: Practically speaking for each PRC case -file we translate the expression ”property right” with the expression ”control right.” We take a property right to be a right to control some asset, resource, or physical thing. A PRC case is analyzed in terms of whether the proposal advances public control or private control (code for public/socialized property or private property). Property controlled by a ‘public entity’ is property controlled by an entity that utilizes a measure of socially sanctioned coercion to control the private assets in its possession and to take those assets from private individuals or groups without their full/complete consent. Applying this to land-use controls, new proposed zoning (anti- development or anti-use controls) socialize preexisting privately controlled real property and place it coercively into public control. Using this framework the PRC looks for the mix of public/private control over an asset or assets and promotes more private control and less public.

Further, Bauer explains that the root property rights philosophy used in the PRC is based on John Locke’s theories of natural property rights. This is the same root used by America’s founding fathers, especially Thomas Jefferson, when they created the US constitution. So using such definition as the basis of PRC policy is right in line with imposing Constitutional law through PRC decisions.

Here’s how the Property Rights Council works, as both a protector for property owners and as an official advocate for private property rights: A PRC is a citizen’s council of between 7 – 9 citizen volunteers, vetted and approved by the County Commission and assigned the task of researching and offering free market recommendations to resolve property rights conflicts.

The mission of the PRC is to review county government activities and inter-governmental activities to determine whether the activities may cause adverse impact to private property rights. The PRC then is charged with supplying to county officials an opinion on that impact. The review includes study of county, state and federal regulations to assure County Commissioners are aware of their impact on property rights and help them prepare proper action that, at all times, assures protection of private property rights in the legal framework of local government. In short, the PRC does the research and provides free market solutions to elected officials that don’t normally have the time or education to do so.

The PRC will also be charged with training county employees to look for property rights violations as they go about their daily tasks in running county government. This could impact the permit process; the way inspectors treat property owners; elimination of invasive or unnecessary regulations; and over-zealous ticket writers.

Perhaps of most importance, the PRC provides the framework for countering the Sustainablist’s legal assault. Specifically, the PRC will interface with a network of free market think tanks which can and will provide legal opinions, reports, and even lawyers to substantiate the property rights legal position. They provide expertise, credibility and a legal force to counter the massive force of the Sustainablists that now overwhelm county officials when a property rights question is at issue. There is a nation-wide network of free market think tanks through the State Policy Network (SPN).There are other such think tanks available in every state. So, when a constituent comes before the Commission with a complaint, now he will not be alone. He will benefit from the PRC’s efforts to protect his rights.

The PRC will deal with issues ranging from wetlands regulations that usurp private property rights; watershed overlays; and zoning. The process can be used to determine the damage caused by such federal regulations as Endangered Species, Conservation Easements, EPA regulations on water and energy use, etc. Decisions made by one PRC could have far reaching effect on those made by other PRCs across the nation. A national database can be established of pending and resolved issues, providing guidance to other PRCs. It will be a precedent-setting decision-making body that could mark the beginning of the restoration of property rights for all Americans.

To assure the PRC contains the proper members (those who advocate and support private property rights) it will be vitally important that the County Commission submit applicants to intense scrutiny as to their ideas and philosophy. PRC members can request the dismissal of another PRC member for cause. The public can request a PRC member be removed for cause. There will be term limits for each member to assure constant movement in the council. The members of the Council will be volunteers.

 

Commissioner Rasor and Bonner County attorney Scott Bauer are succeeding, under great pressure and criticism, to establish a Property Rights Council to protect citizens and their property from the massive force of the planners who are implementing Sustainable Development across the nation. Their goal now is to help others establish such councils in every community, in every state.

Rasor and Bauer are making themselves available to anyone seeking to create a council. They have created tools and an action plan to help local activists start the process to create their own local PRC. They will teach those interested how to lay the ground work; how to select and approach the proper commissioner to get the ball rolling in their community; and finally to get the whole concept on the docket for consideration. To help with that process, Karen Bracken, a property rights activist from Tennessee is serving as the main contact to help activists get started with their own Property Rights Council. Karen will provide preliminary information, and as the process moves forward, she will connect activists directly with Commissioner Rasor and Scott Bauer for more detailed planning. Karen can be reached at her email address.

Contact Karen and get started in the battle to secure private property rights as the first step to countering the massive fire power of the vast network of planning advocates, self-appointed stakeholders, and NGOs that have invaded communities across the nation to enforce top-down control over every aspect of your life and property. Property Rights Councils can and will be the ultimate weapon to defeat Agenda 21 and restore freedom.

© 2012 Tom DeWeese – All Rights Reserved

Related Articles:

1- Tea Party Candidate Warns of UN and Obama's Agenda 21


Tom DeWeese is one of the nation’s leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property rights, personal privacy, back-to-basics education and American sovereignty and independence.

A native of Ohio, he’s been a candidate for the Ohio Legislature, served as editor of two newspapers, and has owned several businesses since the age of 23. In 1989 Tom led the only privately-funded election-observation team to the Panamanian elections. In 2006 Tom was invited to Cambridge University to debate the issue of the United Nations before the Cambridge Union, a 200 year old debating society. Today he serves as Founder and President of the American Policy Center and editor of The DeWeese Report

For 40 years Tom DeWeese has been a businessman, grassroots activist, writer and publisher. As such, he has always advocated a firm belief in man’s need to keep moving forward while protecting our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

The DeWeese Report , 70 Main Street, Suite 23, Warrenton Virginia. (540) 341-8911

E-Mail: admin@americanpolicy.org

E-Mail: ampolicycenter@hotmail.com

Website: www.americanpolicy.org

 

AGENDA 21

Thanks A Lot Georgia, For Shredding Our Constitution

February 6th, 2012 by

 

http://www.westernjournalism.com/thanks-a-lot-georgia-for-shredding-our-constitution/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=90fa66b70c-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

 

BY MIKI BOOTH inShare

On Friday, February 3, 2012 the death knell of America the Beautiful tolled across the fifty states and around the world. An administrative judge in the state of Georgia rewrote the Constitution and ruled in favor of putative president Barack Hussein Obama declaring him a Natural Born Citizen and eligible to be on their state ballot.

Our rule of law is no more. Our Constitution is no more. Obama, Soros, state media, activist judges and all the ‘powers that be’ of a New World Order sealed our fate. The United States is a land of liberty no more.

When Georgia State Judge Michael M. Malihi released his shocking ruling we were stunned. This couldn’t possibly be true. On the eve of the hearing Obama’s lawyers had written a thinly- veiled threat letter to Brian Kemp, GA Secretary of State, demanding that Kemp stop Judge Malahi from moving forward with the three lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility to be on the state ballot. This letter followed another sent days earlier by Obama’s Atlanta attorney Michael Jablonski to Judge Malihi demanding he stop the January 26th hearing and advised the GA judge that Obama would not be attending anyway citing it would interfere with the president’s duties. Malihi replied quickly to the first letter: the hearing would go on. SOS Kemp responded within 2 hours of receiving his letter stating, “…if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.”

At the very least when Obama or his lawyers failed to show up in court a default judgement, earlier considered by the judge, should have denied Obama’s placement on the ballot. Not only did Malihi rule in favor of Obama he completely destroyed the credibility of the plaintiffs, their lawyers, witnesses and evidence that the judge found “unpersuasive.”

Shortly after the devastating ruling, Constitutional Attorney Mario Apuzzo, wrote an editorial entitled, “All That Is Wrong with Georgia State Judge Michael M. Malihi’sDecision.

http:// puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/02/all-that-is-wrong-with-georgia-state.html  Paragraph 2 reads, “The Court held: “For purposes of this analysis, this Court considered that President Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Arkeny [sic meant Ankeny], he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen.”

Paragraph 4: The court did not engage in its own thoughtful and reasoned analysis of the meaning of an Article II “natural born Citizen,” but rather relied only upon Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct.App. 2009), transfer denied, 929 N.E.2d 789 (2010), a state-court decision which erred in how it defined a “natural born Citizen.”

This little known ruling that was undoubtably proffered up by Obama’s dream team of lawyers piqued my curiosity. Why Indiana? Isn’t that the state where they found dozens if not hundredsof faked signatures used to place Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the state’s Democratic primary ballot? http://articles.southbendtribune.com/2011-10-08/news/30259654_1_ballot-petitions-signatures-primary-ballot

Excerpted from SouthBendTribune.com: “Several pages from petitions used to qualify Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for the state’s Democratic primary contain names and signatures that appear to have been copied by hand from a petition for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jim Schellinger. The petitions were filed with the Indiana Election Division after the St. Joseph County Voter Registration Office verified individuals’ information on the documents.”

The state media will not report on “birther’ issues but I scoured the headlines looking for coverage anyway and my heart leaped when I saw on Yahoo! News an AP headline that read, “Indiana election chief found guilty of voter fraud, other charges; faces removal from office” http://news.yahoo.com/indiana-election-chief-found-guilty-voter-fraud-073551102.html As I read my heart sank lower and lower. This had nothing to do with democrat voter fraud and everything to do with getting rid of a republican election official. No doubt with trumped-up charges. The transparency was so obvious and the statement at the end of the article clinched it. Indiana was setting up a fail-safe system to steal the election for Obama: “A Marion County judge has ruled that White should be replaced by Democrat Vop Osili, the man he defeated by about 300,000 votes in the November 2010 election, but that ruling is on hold pending an appeal. Attorney Karen Celestino-Horseman, who watched the trial and spoke on behalf of Indiana Democrats following the verdict, said the party believes White’s conviction further affirms that Osili should be secretary of state. “(White) has been convicted, but the judge has left it open for misdemeanor sentencing. That’s something that’s going to have to be examined,” she said. During his closing arguments, assistant special prosecutor Dan Sigler Jr. argued that White knew that he was committing voter fraud but did it anyway for political power. “If we aren’t going to enforce election law against the secretary of state of Indiana, who are we going to enforce it against?” Sigler said.”

In the Epilogue of my book, Memoirs of a Community Organizer from Hawai’i http:// mikibooth.com/2011/11/15/memoirs-of-a-community-organizer-from-hawaii/ is another damning implication for Indiana: “Through private investigators and skip-tracers associated with birthersummit.orghttp://www.birthersummit.org/ we learned that Obama’s Kenyan family members’ Social Security numbers were issued around the same time as his. When Obama’s long-lost “Uncle Omar” was arrested for drunk driving, he was exposed as an illegal alien but has a valid Social Security number. Digging deeper they found it was assigned in the late 1970’s as was a Social Security number for Obama’s half-aunt, Zeituni Onyango, who had also been issued a deportation order but was allowed to stay when she surfaced in government-subsidized housing collecting welfare in Boston, MA. Zeituni’s Social Security number begins with a prefix reserved for residents of Indiana, but there is no evidence she ever lived in or even visited the state.”

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

What I would like to know is. Where the hell is the out-rage  from every Georgia citizen? Is Georgia a populated by a bunch of liberal puke’s?

It hardly seems like a southern mind set to me. Let’s hear it Georgia, are you going to get rid of the Sec. of State or who ever appointed this scumbag to his bench? Send this rag-head Judge back to the desert, and his so called President with him. Obama is a scourge and an embarrassment to America.

 

 

 "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

 

 

 

 

America’s Sheriffs Fight Barack Obama And Federal Government

February 5th, 2012 by

 

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/03-02-2012/120412-america_sheriffs_obama-0/

Strange that we must read Pravda to get the news! 

 

By Dr. Eowyn

February 2, 2012

 

Something extraordinary and historic took place mere days ago in Las Vegas, Nevada.

For three days, from January 29 and 31, 2012, in the Tuscany Hotel & Casino, more than 120 county sheriffs, from across the United States of America, met in a first annual, "Constitutional Sheriffs Convention".

This is what Wikipedia says about U.S. sheriffs: "In the United States, a sheriff is a county official and is typically the top law enforcement officer of a county. Historically, the sheriff was also commander of the militia in that county. Distinctive to law enforcement in the United States, sheriffs are usually elected. The political election of a person to serve as a police leader is an almost uniquely American tradition."

The first Constitutional Sheriffs Convention is the brainchild of the www.CountySheriffProject.org and the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association at www.CSPOA.org .

For a video describing the CSPOA, go to www.YouTube.com and type in: Special report: County Sheriffs Push Back Against Feds

The convention's objective is two-fold:

1. To increase the understanding and awareness for all sheriffs and peace officers regarding the true power of our constitutional authority and duty to serve and protect the people for whom we work.

2. To unite in a concerted effort to uphold and defend the United States Constitution.

Given the importance of the convention, it is curious to say the least that the media have chosen to totally ignore it. Curious, too, is the fact that I scoured the Internet yesterday but could find scant news on the convention, much less a report – not even on the website of the County Sheriff Project.

But I did find an audio of a 1.5 hr Revolution Radio broadcast on the convention, an hour of which consists of phoned-in interviews with several sheriffs who attended the conference, as well as other attendees, mainly Stewart Rhodes, founder of www.OathKeepers.org To listen to the audio, Go to google and type in: Revolution Radio: Constitutional Sheriffs Conference

Stewart Rhodes said the sheriffs "are working on a series of resolutions" at the convention, among which is a "Resolution of the Sheriff Against NDAA 2012", drafted by Rhodes and constitutional attorney Richard Fry, for the sheriffs to sign.

NDAA is the notorious National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 which effectively nullifies the Bill of Rights by making it lawful for the U.S. President and the military to arrest and detain U.S. citizens without charge or trial. From the Oath Keepers' website, it appears the sheriffs at the convention did not sign the Resolution as a collective body. Rhodes is asking the sheriffs to sign the Resolution as individual sheriffs.

Rhodes opined that political party labels don't mean much anymore, referring in particular to how the NDAA is "a bipartisan assault on our civil liberties," which was spearheaded by Republican John McCain and Democrat Carl Levin.

Rhodes emphasized that a second American Revolution has already taken place under our noses and our Constitution's been overthrown. "We have had people who are determined to destroy our Constitutional Republic to create a tyranny." But this revolution is not fully recognized by the American people, who must be informed and educated. He calls for Americans, especially the military and the police, to emulate the "peaceful revolution of 1800″ when Thomas Jefferson and James Madison rose up against the Anti-Sedition Act to sweep federal oath-breakers out of office.

Rhodes was followed by several sheriffs, who spoke one by one. They included: Sheriff Dean Wilson of Del Norte County in Northern California, Sheriff John Cooke of Weld County, Colorado, Sheriff John Lopey from Northern California's Siskiyou County and Sheriff Greg Hagwood of Plumas County in Northern California. An excellent video of these men explaining there problems with Federal agents and how they defeated them can be seen by going to www.YouTube.com and typing in: Constitutional sheriffs. And for a very good explanation of a Sheriff successfully opposing the Federal Government and protecting the citizens in his county, type in: Sheriff Tony DeMeo.

120 to 140 sheriffs from all across America. Many ("a great showing") from California and the western states, but also from Texas, Florida and the eastern seaboard. Some sheriffs also brought their second-in-charge to the convention. A list of the names of the sheriffs who were at the convention will be published.

There was a Sheriffs Panel in which 8 sheriffs spoke.

There were presentations by various speakers who "spoke powerfully" on Agenda 21 and the Bill of Rights. Even though some of the sheriffs didn't know about some of the issues, "they are listening" and "have a humility about them." "They really want to know and are sticking their necks out by coming here.

What the sheriffs got out of the conference: 1. A renewed knowledge and understanding of the U.S. Constitution and "how it's related to county sheriffs who are sworn to defend and protect the Constitution.

tyranny

 

CAFR reviews and the path to Ending Taxation progresses.

February 4th, 2012 by

Ready for a "Real" change?

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Every citizen has a responsibility to help America cast off the tyranny of our federal government and the International Banking Cartel that controls it. Otherwise U.N. Agenda 21 will bury freedom so deep we will never breathe the air of freedom again. This is a warning, not just a suggestion! Recently a scumbag judge in George gave us a real knife in the back, and no doubt destroyed the resolve of hundreds of thousands of  Americas who now are convinced we can do nothing to defeat the enemy within, but I beg to differ with that and Walter Burien has the proof. If you will go to CAFR1.com and do a little reading you will see that we can recover enormous power over the PTB by taking control of the investment income of the local, State, and Federal governments. Granted Walt is a genius and you may not understand everything but if you take the time to present it to your local governments you can make a big difference in the economic structure of your community, and believe me this will catch on fire and sweep the Nation if you will just give it a try. The alternative is to lose everything you have to the tyrants in charge.

 

http://www.dailypaul.com/210731/cafr-reviews-and-the-path-to-ending-taxation-progresses-ready-for-a-real-change

 

Submitted by CAFR1 on Fri, 02/03/2012 – 01:57

Daily Paul Liberty Forum

Two Counties in the US are looking at and will be launching the TRF funding principle that generates the revenue required to satisfy the general purpose operating budgets within that venue. The names of the counties will be kept confidential until just before launch.

With the designated purpose of generating the revenue needed to meet general purpose operating budgets, the TRF in its operation systematically allows for elimination of taxation on the County level as well as for all cities, townships, and school districts in the county. One revenue source (taxation) is replaced with another (return from the TRF)as they develop and grow and thus taxation is not needed.

When the TRF launches CAFR1 will use software that will access numerous data banks to compile all of the financial managers that now will become members of the TRFA (Tax Retirement Fund Association). The data bank will have each managers fund performance record going back 20 years.

Any local government (Miami, FL for example) who wishes to implement the TRF fund management principle, with a keystroke at this end the top fund managers in the Miami area are identified, the fund management team is compiled, and their collective fund management performance record is seen predicating their assignment.

The team will now do the audit of the local venues; implement the TRF program under specific standardized guidelines of consolidation and growth to phase out X tax, and then X tax until all taxation is eliminated from that venue. Personal, sales, property, and corporate.

The software will also monitor each TRF fund's performance to identify and maximize compliance with TRF objectives and set timelines for compliance with the objectives in each specific venue at the stroke of the keyboard.

The data processing company that gets the TRF data management contract could develop that contract into their #1 client especially being that their is a potential for 136,000 local government's in the US and then many more in Canada for their participation with the TRFA. Additionally included in the monitoring is the performance of up to 150,000 fund managers that may be involved from the US and Canada from the get-go.

I note that they, government and everyone else "will" inevitably implement TRF operations being that it satisfies that age-old aspect of the greed and opportunity principle for all three power groups in a "true" mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship;

The Public = no taxation and they build their wealth as the "First Line Beneficiaries" of the investment return of the TRF through the elimination of taxation. The public now with greater prosperity can feed that beast by their own commerce activity and benefits each and every time they do;

Government gets their same truck loads of cash rolling in from the returns on the TRF funds and in time more cash rolling in than what they now are getting from taxation being eliminated out of the picture;

The financial cartels / industrial complex will have more "stable" equity for capital reinvestment under management then they do now or ever ever dreamed about..

A win-win for all involved and a prosperous and "stable" economy to boot for the next 1000-years. You see satisfying that ever driving force of the greed and oppertunity principle for one-and-all makes it work and makes it happen as far as time goes, "in the blink of an eye".

For the last 5000 years government's intent going back to the days of the Pharaohs has viewed the population as being a productivity resource to be drained and managed. That has never been a good thing nor will it ever be a good thing.

Under the TRF management principle the most important aspect is "it changes government's intent towards the population". The population is no longer viewed as being a productivity resource to be drained and managed, government's intent now transitions into wanting to see the population as wealthy and as prosperous as possible.

You see the more wealthy and prosperous the population is, the more goods, products, and services the population is purchasing and thus more truckloads of cash rolling into the government's coffers from the investment return being generated from the TRFs. Again, a win-win for all involved.

I wonder what Mr. Paul would say to the above? :<) Big ventures require strong, sincere, and persevering minds / spirits to get the job done.

To view a basic video presentation per the above please watch the documentary The Only Game in Town – 2012 The Only Game the public, government, and the financial / corporate sector should be playing with that being "ending taxation.. We are talking all taxation, personal and corporate. An economy based on cash and investment only.. taxation cut out of the equation for all time to come.

Truly yours and wishing for a good future for "one-and-all",

Walter J. Burien, Jr. – CAFR1.com
Saint Johns, AZ
Tel. (928) 458-5854

02 03 12 CAFR1 NATIONAL POST


Please share the following link with all that you know:

http://www.dailypaul.com/210731/

cafr-reviews-and-the-path-to-ending-taxation-progresses-ready-for-a-real-change?

Sent FYI and Truly Yours from,

Walter Burien – CAFR1.com
P. O. Box 2112
Saint Johns, AZ 85936

Tel. (928) 458-5854
__________________________________

——-FOOTER NOTE——

Per understanding CAFRs, people have been intentionally kept in the dark so long they forget the basics:

1. A "Budget Report" is a selective funding of x accounts from x resources (set up to be primarily funded with taxation and done so "for the year")

2. An "Annual Financial Report" is the showing of "all" income: Investment; taxation; and Enterprise, plus the "accumulated wealth over decades. Budgets are for the year, an AFR is for it all since creation of the entity.

There is a big difference between the two. A correct analogy would be: The budget to operate your house vs. your statement of net worth.

The public has been played with the biggest shell game of selective presentation there is allowing for massive fortunes to be made by the inside players over the last several decades..

Every investment fund large and small is a power base. Where that money is invested determines what company; real-estate venture, etc., is made or broken. Thus in line with that, never a mention of the 184,000 AFRs of the corresponding local governments..nor the many thousands of specialty investment funds they contain. I note gov pension funds facilitate the same. Paying employee benefits from the return on the funds is an after thought for the government players.

The head communists back in the 30's and 40's said they could take over America without firming a shot. The undercurrents of that statement were that they could depend on the greed and opportunity of the players to accomplish that goal and it did. US Collective government since 2000 brings in more gross income than the entire gross income of the population of the United States.

Taxation is rammed down the public's throat (1/3rd of the gross income) and Investment / Enterprise income (2/3rd of the gross income) the "silence is golden" rule is strictly enforced with the full symbiotic cooperation of the syndicated media; controlled education; and both political parties as applies over the last century.

TAXATION

 

 

ALL OF OUR LEADERS ARE NOT LOYAL

February 3rd, 2012 by

 

http://www.newswithviews.com/Kress/joe146.htm

By Joe Kress

February 3, 2012

NewsWithViews.com

Before you vote, make sure you are aware that Newt Gingrich is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, an organization where one must be recommended to belong. The CFR is the center of the promotion for the New World Order. Its purpose is to make sure that the United States becomes borderless and a part of globalism subject to a small oligarchy at the top where the enormously wealthy Royal families of Europe, the international banks headed by the Rothschild, Morgan, Rockefeller dynasties and of course George Soros, all sit in the catbird seat to control the world's money supply…and create a new currency to substitute for the sinking dollar. This is the way to control nations depleted of nationhood where the world court in Brussels can dictate decisions by unelected judges and the U.N. becomes the substitute arbiter of who shall survive and who shall not – having the military might to back it up.

Already, the International monetary fund and the World Bank are subsidized primarily by U.S. taxpayers, These financial monoliths create vassals of third world countries charging un-repayable interest and dictating the terms for building unneeded dams to run electrical power plants in jungles where only wells are needed. Many of the poorest countries have denuded millions of acres of forests in Central America in order to pay off debt to the World Bank only to discover too late that it would take several generations to grow crops on the land which had become arid or permanent swamps due to the wet, hot climate.

Argentina is the example that finally decided not to repay its debt to the International Monetary Fund and still hasn't recovered economically from bankruptcy.

The estimate of the composition of America's oligarchy is one percent but we should know that both Hitler and Lenin began with less numbers. Jacob Schiff, a multi-billionaire at the turn of the century funded the transportation of Trotskyites living in New York to start the Russian Revolution. It was Averell Harriman who funded the first cement plant for Stalin and Prescott Bush who headed the Harriman bank in Berlin and was instrumental in funding Hitler's war machine up to the commencement of the Second World War.

Gingrich is not alone in his membership; he is joined by many in the House and Senate dedicated members of the CFR, the Trilateral Commission founded by David Rockefeller. President Ford was a Bilderberg member, also Clinton – George H.W. Bush and Carter were members of Rockefeller's Trilateral Commission and the CFR dedicated to enable the onslaught of world government. George W Bush is a member of Yale’s Skull and Bones part of the ILLUMINATTI. Their memberships to these organizations leaves no doubt as to who are key to the second tier in the pecking order of the supreme elite.

We still have the trappings of a constitution and the flag still flies, but don't be fooled we are entering the area of George Orwell, the Animal Farm and 1980. Those presidents starting with Teddy Roosevelt's manifest destiny and Wilson's social experiment controlled by what he stated is subject to power that can only be whispered and of which he dare not speak. He also said that he has destroyed his country in his waning years. Approval of the Federal Reserve and its factoring, self printing of unbacked notes and the Income Tax and being led into WW I and the establishment o The League of Nations with help by his friend and confident, Rothschild agent “Col. House.” These are really what Woodrow was thinking when he made that confessional statement.

David Rockefeller congratulated the major media for not revealing the accomplishments and secret deals to place the United States in the position where Europe finds itself – a gaggle of countries that turned over their independence to what is now a part of International socialism, controlled by those who are able to coin money and therefore limit or increase interest on unbacked paper notes and institute and enable dependence and servitude for the hoi polloi. From all indications that is what the Federal Reserve has accomplished here in the U.S. The middle class is slowly being evaporated.

The euro is an example of what the Rockefellers foresee as the fate of Canada and the United States, Central and South America. The long held plan of the CFR branches in the U.S. Canada and Australia are the active arms of the Royal Institute on International Affairs, coupled with the Club of Rome, the Trilateralists and the Bilderberg Group, funded by the super billionaires and in several cases trillionaries who want a common world currency. The Royal Family of Great Britain whose enormous wealth is centered in land and corporate interests, The Royals of Denmark, Sweden and Spain, the Warburgs of Germany, the Rockefeller, Morgan and Rothschild dynasties, the latter centered in London having their foreign banks located within the U.S., and whose representatives are on our Federal open market committee, on the FED’s board of directors and their investment bankers located throughout the Western hemisphere.

The Republican and Democrat parties are joined at the hip and funded by these mega, wealthy individuals and by international corporations, financial houses and especially the media heads who make a mockery of honesty in journalism and the news. The major media moguls are enrolled in and complicit with the international socialists, propagandists for the new Tower of Babble. Their dreams of a Global Society without borders, without free people’s input as to their future and devoid of nationhood – all being dictated to by them, the elite numbering in the thousands, but less than one/ one millionth of the world’s population.

Obama already has in his war chest a billion dollars. That didn't come from the nickel and dimes from those he claims to represent.

This nation no longer is a democratic republic…rather it has become a tool of the super rich members of the above mentioned elite who preselect our presidents based on their cooperation and complicity with the elite’s ultimate goals. Obama has, in their opinion done superbly carrying out the plans well laid out for him by his backers.

Ron Paul, a product of the people’s Tea Party movement is of the four remaining candidates although leading a lonely crusade. Those who are not blinded by rhetoric, mundane generalities, or comic fusillades against their competitor candidates see that Paul is a Constitutionalist against globalism and the U.S. being the surrogate in fighting undeclared and none winnable wars, destroying. our military strength and the nations’ treasury. He sees our military and its weaponry stretched to unheard of limits by two undeclared wars and military located in 130 countries around the globe.

Obama, funded by those elite, has insured his reelection because his constituents are welfare queens , illegal future voters – all those with their free handouts wanting a free ride and willing to sell their souls for their food stamps, free medical insurance and whatever and whoever the government will offer up for their vote.

Newt as Speaker of House contributed nothing while Reagan set the stage for recovery of the economy. Newt and his ideas were borrowed from the Tofflers and their radical un-American books. He changed ideas as fast as he speaks to such an extent that even his colleagues decided they had enough and fired him; the only Speaker to be fined and dismissed from the House of Representatives. But there is a more sinister reason for Newt’s downfall…he is a certified member of the CFR and joins those decrepit, power hungry elite who attend the Bohemian Grove debaucheries and secret spectacle. His claim is that he found Christ in the Catholic Church but that belies the fact that he has not renounced the Tofflers or their New Age books or can we believe that he changed his mind relative to gun control or abortion on demand?

Certainly, this nation deserves better leaders, but dangerous, new world order advocates I don’t think so.

© 2012 Joe Kress – All Rights Reserved

 


The "Curmudgeon," Joseph H. Kress, Lt. Col. USAF (Ret) obtain a B.S. in Business Administration, with a major in economics and minor in accounting.

He served in England and Viet Nam where he received the Bronze Star during the TET Offensive, then he was appointed Chief of Supply for two state-side assignments; the DOD's Defense Disposal Agency where he was chief of disposal operations for all of Southeast Asia, based at CINCPAC Headquarters in Hawaii. He retired from Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio as chief of supply with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel at the age of 52, and now he and his wife reside in Summerville, S.C.

Since leaving the military, he was involved in political campaigns, writing articles for the local papers, and as a realtor. 

E-mail: jkress@sc.rr.com

CORRUPTION

Bankers Committed Fraud to Get Bigger Bonuses

February 2nd, 2012 by

 

Wall Streets Insights & Indictments

 

by Shah Gilani

Dear Reader,

In case you didn't catch the article titled "Guilty Pleas Hit the 'Mark'" in yesterday's Wall Street Journal, I'm here to make sure you don't miss it.

This is too good.

Three former employees of Credit Suisse Group AG (NYSE:CS) were charged with conspiracy to falsify books and records and wire fraud. They were accused of mismarking prices on bonds in their trading books by soliciting trumped-up prices for their withering securities from friends in the business.

By posting higher "marks" for their bonds in late 2007, they earned big year-end bonuses.

What a shock!

What's not a shock is that, after a bang-up 2007, Credit Suisse had to take a $2.85 billion write-down in the first quarter of 2008. No one knows how much of that loss was attributable to the three co-conspirators, who were fired over their "wrongdoing."

Two of the three accused pleaded guilty. Also not shocking is the reason David Higgs – one who pleaded guilty – gave for his actions. He said he did it "to remain in good favor" with bosses, who determined his bonus, and who profited handsomely themselves from his profitable trading and inventory marks.

As for Salmaan Siddiqui, the other trader who pleaded guilty? His attorney Ira Sorkin, the former SEC enforcement chief, said of his client, "What he did was the result of his boss and his boss' boss directing him to do it."

You know what else is shocking?

Everyone was dong this at all the brokerages, investment banks and commercial banks that had trading desks… and only three people have been charged.

What's even more shocking (though not to me) is that the "system" has been engineered over years to allow banks to hold riskier and riskier securities, with more and more leverage, and, in the most egregious affront to sense and safety, be allowed to mark their inventories (including exotic instruments that no one really knew how to price) based on internal "models" and extrapolated scenarios. Whatever that means.

Everyone up the chain, from the trader making bets to his boss, his boss' boss, all the way up to the chairman, eats off the same plate.

And you know what they say about where you eat…

Marking your trading book within the bounds of what you can get away with isn't exactly condoned, but neither is it frowned upon – especially at year-end, when bonuses are being calculated. After all, you'll always have next year to trade out of losses or turn them into winners.

It's about getting paid and how much.

But don't just blame the traders and their bosses. Blame the politicians and the regulators who tore up sound Depression-era banking laws and coddled big banks by "desupervising" them when deregulation didn't deliver the whole train to the station.

Find out where the mortgage-backed securities boom really started, who greased some of the steepest slopes, and why and how everything leads back to bonuses.

How Deregulation Ended Honesty in the Banking Sector

Here's what happened, in broad strokes (borrowed from articles I've written for MoneyMorning.com).

In 1988, the Basel Accord established international risk-based capital requirements for deposit-taking commercial banks. In a byproduct of the calculations of what constituted mortgage-related risk (traditional mortgage loans have long maturities and are illiquid), lenders were expected to set aside substantial reserves; however, "marketable securities" that could theoretically be sold easily would not require much in the way of reserves.

To free up reserves for more productive pursuits, banks made a wholesale shift from originating and holding mortgages to packaging them and holding mortgage assets in a securitized form.

That lessened asset-quality considerations and ushered in the new era of asset-liquidity considerations.

Meanwhile, over at the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the appointment of free-market disciple Wendy Gramm (wife of then-U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Tex.)) as chairman would result in her successful 1989 and 1993 exemption of swaps and derivatives from all regulation.

These actions would turn out to be consequential in the reign of terror that was to come…

In 1993, with her agenda accomplished, Wendy Gramm resigned from her CFTC post to take a seat on the Enron Corp. board as a member of its audit committee. We all know what happened there. (Wait a minute; I did say she was on the audit committee, right?)

Of course, Enron's fraud and implosion became the poster child for deregulation run amok.

It ultimately helped spawn Sarbanes-Oxley legislation, which has its own issues, but nonetheless has prevented all kinds of fraud and inappropriate behavior on account of the fact that top executives have to attest to the veracity of, and sign off on, all financial documents and other "stuff."

Now, don't lose any sleep over the fact that of all the CEOs and CFOs and other muckety-muck multi-multi-millionaire executives that ran and still run the too-big-to-fail banks and the banks and investment banks that did fail or were merged (because they failed but were valuable to banks who wanted to make themselves bigger so they would never be allowed to fail) ever were charged with any crime under Sarbanes-Oxley.

Why shouldn't you worry? Because, silly, there's a concerted effort to do away with the law. After all, don't you know, it hampers business from creating jobs, which we desperately need?

Hold on.

Sorry. I just returned from the bathroom, where I was getting sick.

Anyway, the constant flow of money to lobbyists and into legislators' campaign coffers was paying off for banking interests.

The Fed, under Chairman Greenspan, along with Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, was methodically deconstructing the foundation of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act.

The final breaching of the wall occurred in 1998, when Citibank was bought by Travelers.

The deal married Citibank, a commercial bank, with Travelers' Solomon, Smith Barney investment bank, and the Travelers insurance business.

There was only one problem: The deal was clearly illegal in light of Glass-Steagall and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. However, a legal loophole in the 1956 BHC Act gave the new Citicorp a five-year window to change the landscape, or the deal would have to be unwound.

Phil Gramm – the fire breathing free-marketer, Texas senator, and then-chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs (and loving husband of Wendy) – rode to the rescue, propelled by a sea of more than $300 million in lobbying and campaign contributions.

In 1999, in the ultimate proof that money is power, U.S. President Bill Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act, at once doing away with Glass-Steagall and the 1956 BHC Act, and crowning Citigroup Inc. (NYSE:C) as the new "King of the Hill."

From his position of power, Sen. Gramm consistently leveraged his Ph.D. in economics and free-market ideology to espouse the virtues of subprime lending, where he famously once stated: "I look at subprime lending and I see the American Dream in action."

If helping struggling borrowers pursue their homeownership dreams was such a noble cause, it might have been incumbent upon the senator to not block legislation advocating the curtailment of predatory lending practices.

Oh well. Let's not quibble with a Senator.

From 1989 through 2002, federal records show that Sen. Gramm was the top recipient of contributions from commercial banks and among the top five recipients of campaign contributions from Wall Street. (See my article "How Subprime Borrowing Fueled the Credit Crisis.")

Since moving on from the Senate in 2002 to mega-universal Swiss banking giant UBS AG (NYSE:UBS), where he serves as an investment banker and lobbyist, Gramm makes no apologies.

"The markets have worked better than you might have thought," he has been quoted as saying. "There is this idea afloat that if you had more regulation you would have fewer mistakes. I don't see any evidence in our history or anybody else's to substantiate that."

On April 28, 2004, in a fitting (and perhaps flagrant) final act of eviscerating prudent regulation, the SEC ruled that investment banks could essentially determine their own net capital.

The insanity of that allowance is only surpassed by the fact that the SEC allowed the change because it was simultaneously demanding greater scrutiny of the books and records of what were the holding companies of investment banks and all their affiliates.

The tragedy is that the SEC never used its new powers to examine the banks.

The idea was that Consolidated Supervised Entities (CSEs) could use internal "models" to determine risk and compliance with net capital requirements.

In reality, what the investment banks did was essentially re-cast hybrid capital instruments, subordinated debt, deferred tax returns, and securities with no ready market into "healthy" capital assets, against which they reduced reserve requirements for net capital calculations and increased their leverage to as much as 30:1. (Here's "How Wall Street Manufactures Financial Services Products," an insider's look at how greed on Wall Street results in unscrupulous investment instruments.)

When the meltdown came, the leverage and concentration of bad assets quickly resulted in the shotgun marriage of insolvent Bear Stearns Cos. to JP Morgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM), the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holding, the sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America Corp. (NYSE:BAC), and the rushed acceptance of applications by Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) and Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) to convert to bank holding companies so they could feed at the taxpayer bailout trough and feast on the Fed's new smörgåsbord of liquidity handouts.

There are no more CSEs (the SEC announced an end to that program in September). The old investment bank model is dead.

The motivation for bankers to undermine and inhibit prudent regulation is inherent in banker compensation incentives.

The Journal of Financial Research sums up the problem on compensation by concluding: "Firm characteristics that influence managerial compensation include leverage (as a measure of observable risk) market-to-book ratio of assets, size and shareholder return. Evidence suggests that Bank Holding Companies may be exploiting the deposit insurance mechanism because leverage is a significant factor in their results for incentive-based components of compensation. Our results strongly support the view that fundamental shifts in business activities of Bank Holding Companies have influenced their compensation strategies."

And we wonder if bankers are good people or merely compensation and bonus whores…

You do the math.

As far as telling you what's wrong with America – a lot of you wrote in to say you DO want to know – this is part of it. But we can see this part clearly.

What we can't see is how we really got here, where here is, and where we're going next.

You'll get that on Sunday.

Not because I want to ruin your Super Bowl Sunday. But because I hope you pass it along to the friends you'll gather with later in the day, and before the beer flows and the game starts, maybe you'll ask yourself and ask your friends… is this really happening?

Shah

BANKING FRAUD

 

 

Bombshell Barack Obama outed as CIA creation

February 1st, 2012 by

Bombshell Barack Obama outed as CIA creation

Special Report. The Story of Obama: All in The Company (In Three Parts)

Opinion Maker | August 19, 2010
Wayne Madsen

Imperial Intervention

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen has discovered CIA files that document the agency’s connections to institutions and individuals figuring prominently in the lives of Barack Obama and his mother, father, grandmother, and stepfather. The first part of his report highlights the connections between Barack Obama, Sr. and the CIA-sponsored operations in Kenya to counter rising Soviet and Chinese influence among student circles and, beyond, to create conditions obstructing the emergence of independent African leaders.

President Obama’s own work in 1983 for Business International Corporation, a CIA front that conducted seminars with the world’s most powerful leaders and used journalists as agents abroad, dovetails with CIA espionage activities conducted by his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham in 1960s post-coup Indonesia on behalf of a number of CIA front operations, including the East-West Center at the University of Hawaii, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Ford Foundation. Dunham met and married Lolo Soetoro, Obama’s stepfather, at the East-West Center in 1965. Soetoro was recalled to Indonesia in 1965 to serve as a senior army officer and assist General Suharto and the CIA in the bloody overthrow of President Sukarno.

Barack Obama, Sr., who met Dunham in 1959 in a Russian language class at the University of Hawaii, had been part of what was described as an airlift of 280 East African students to the United States to attend various colleges — merely “aided” by a grant from the Joseph P. Kennedy Foundation, according to a September 12, 1960, Reuters report from London. The airlift was a CIA operation to train and indoctrinate future agents of influence in Africa, which was becoming a battleground between the United States and the Soviet Union and China for influence among newly-independent and soon-to-be independent countries on the continent.

The airlift was condemned by the deputy leader of the opposition Kenyan African Democratic Union (KADU) as favoring certain tribes — the majority Kikuyus and minority Luos — over other tribes to favor the Kenyan African National Union (KANU), whose leader was Tom Mboya, the Kenyan nationalist and labor leader who selected Obama, Sr. for a scholarship at the University of Hawaii. Obama, Sr., who was already married with an infant son and pregnant wife in Kenya, married Dunham on Maui on February 2, 1961 and was also the university’s first African student. Dunham was three month’s pregnant with Barack Obama, Jr. at the time of her marriage to Obama, Sr.

KADU deputy leader Masinda Muliro, according to Reuters, said KADU would send a delegation to the United States to investigate Kenyan students who received “gifts” from the Americans and “ensure that further gifts to Kenyan students are administered by people genuinely interested in Kenya’s development.’”

Mboya received a $100,000 grant for the airlift from the Kennedy Foundation after he turned down the same offer from the U.S. State Department, obviously concerned that direct U.S. assistance would look suspicious to pro-Communist Kenyan politicians who suspected Mboya of having CIA ties. The Airlift Africa project was underwritten by the Kennedy Foundation and the African-American Students Foundation. Obama, Sr. was not on the first airlift but a subsequent one. The airlift, organized by Mboya in 1959, included students from Kenya, Uganda, Tanganyika, Zanzibar, Northern Rhodesia, Southern Rhodesia, and Nyasaland.

Reuters also reported that Muliro charged that Africans were “disturbed and embittered” by the airlift of the selected students. Muliro “stated that “preferences were shown to two major tribes [Kikuyu and Luo] and many U.S.-bound students had failed preliminary and common entrance examinations, while some of those left behind held first-class certificates.”

Obama, Sr. was a friend of Mboya and a fellow Luo. After Mboya was assassinated in 1969, Obama, Sr. testified at the trial of his alleged assassin. Obama, Sr. claimed he was the target of a hit-and-run assassination attempt after his testimony.

Obama, Sr., who left Hawaii for Harvard in 1962, divorced Dunham in 1964. Obama, Sr. married a fellow Harvard student, Ruth Niedesand, a Jewish-American woman, who moved with him to Kenya and had two sons. They were later divorced. Obama, Sr. worked for the Kenyan Finance and Transport ministries as well as an oil firm. Obama, Sr. died in a 1982 car crash and his funeral was attended by leading Kenyan politicians, including future Foreign Minister Robert Ouko, who was murdered in 1990.

CIA files indicate that Mboya was an important agent-of-influence for the CIA, not only in Kenya but in all of Africa. A formerly Secret CIA Current Intelligence Weekly Summary, dated November 19, 1959, states that Mboya served as a check on extremists at the second All-African People’s Conference (AAPC) in Tunis. The report states that “serious friction developed between Ghana’s Prime Minister Kwame Nkrumah and Kenyan nationalist Tom Mboya who cooperated effectively last December to check extremists at the AAPC’s first meeting in Accra.” The term “cooperated effectively” appears to indicate that Mboya was cooperating with the CIA, which filed the report from field operatives in Accra and Tunis. While “cooperating” with the CIA in Accra and Tunis, Mboya selected the father of the president of the United States to receive a scholarship and be airlifted to the University of Hawaii where he met and married President Obama’s mother.

An earlier CIA Current Intelligence Weekly Summary, secret, and dated April 3, 1958, states that Mboya “still appears to be the most promising of the African leaders.” Another CIA weekly summary, secret and dated December 18, 1958, calls Mboya the Kenyan nationalist an “able and dynamic young chairman” of the People’s Convention party who was viewed as an opponent of “extremists” like Nkrumah, supported by “Sino-Soviet representatives.”

In a formerly Secret CIA report on the All-Africa Peoples Conference in 1961, dated November 1, 1961, Mboya’s conservatism, along with that of Taleb Slim of Tunisia, are contrasted to the leftist policies of Nkrumah and others. Pro-communists who were elected to the AAPC’s steering committee at the March 1961 Cairo conference, attended by Mboya, are identified in the report as Abdoulaye Diallo, AAPC Secretary General, of Senegal; Ahmed Bourmendjel of Algeria; Mario de Andrade of Angola; Ntau Mokhele of Basutoland; Kingue Abel of Cameroun; Antoine Kiwewa of Congo (Leopoldville); Kojo Botsio of Ghana; Ismail Toure of Guinea; T. O. Dosomu Johnson of Liberia; Modibo Diallo of Mali; Mahjoub Ben Seddik of Morocco; Djibo Bakari of Niger; Tunji Otegbeya of Nigeria; Kanyama Chiume of Nyasaland; Ali Abdullahi of Somalia; Tennyson Makiwane of South Africa, and Mohamed Fouad Galal of the United Arab Republic.

The only attendees in Cairo who were given a clean bill of health by the CIA were Mboya, who appears to have been a snitch for the agency, and Joshua Nkomo of Southern Rhodesia, B. Munanka of Tanganyika, Abdel Magid Shaker of Tunisia, and John Kakonge of Uganda.

Nkrumah would eventually be overthrown in a 1966 CIA-backed coup while he was on a state visit to China and North Vietnam. The CIA overthrow of Nkrumah followed by one year the agency’s overthrow of Sukarno, another coup that was connected to President Obama’s family on his mother’s side. There are suspicions that Mboya was assassinated in 1969 by Chinese agents working with anti-Mboya factions in the government of Kenyan President Jomo Kenyatta in order to eliminate a pro-U.S. leading political leader in Africa. Upon Mboya’s death, every embassy in Nairobi flew its flag at half-mast except for one, the embassy of the People’s Republic of China.

Mboya’s influence in the Kenyatta government would continue long after his death and while Obama, Sr. was still alive. In 1975, after the assassination of KANU politician Josiah Kariuki, a socialist who helped start KANU, along with Mboya and Obama, Sr., Kenyatta dismissed three rebellious cabinet ministers who “all had personal ties to either Kariuki or Tom Mboya.” This information is contained in CIA Staff Notes on the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia, formerly Top Secret Umbra, Handle via COMINT Channels, dated June 24, 1975. The intelligence in the report, based on its classification, indicate the information was derived from National Security Agency intercepts in Kenya. No one was ever charged in the assassination of Kariuki.

The intecepts of Mboya’s and Kariuki’s associates are an indication that the NSA and CIA also maintain intercepts on Barack Obama, Sr., who, as a non-U.S. person, would have been lawfully subject at the time to intercepts carried out by NSA and Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).

(Continued below)

Special Report. The Story of Obama: All in The Company – Part II

In Part I of this WMR special report, we revealed the connections between Barack Obama, Sr. and the CIA-affiliated Airlift Africa project to provide college degrees to and gain influence over a group of 280 eastern and southern African students from soon-to-be independent African nations to counter similar programs established by the Soviet Union and China. Barack Obama Sr. was the first African student to attend the University of Hawaii. Obama Sr. and Obama’s mother Stanley Ann Dunham met in a Russian language class in 1959 and they married in 1961.

The African airlift program was administered by Kenyan nationalist leader Tom Mboya, a fellow Luo tribe mentor and friend of the senior Obama. According to CIA documents described in Part I, Mboya also served the CIA in ensuring that pro-Soviet and pro-Chinese African nationalists were stymied in their attempt to dominate pan-African nationalist political, student, and labor movements.

One of Mboya’s chief opponents was Ghana’s first president, Kwame Nkrumah, who was ousted in a CIA-inspired coup in 1966, one year before to Obama Sr’s son, Barack Obama, Jr. and his mother joined Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian who Obama’s mother met at the University of Hawaii in 1965, when President Obama was four years old.

In 1967, Obama and his mother joined her husband in Jakarta. In 1965, Lolo Soetoro had been called back from Hawaii by General Suharto to serve as an officer in the Indonesian military to help launch a bloody CIA-backed genocide of Indonesian Communists and Indonesian Chinese throughout the expansive country. Suharto consolidated his power in 1966, the same year that Barack Obama, Sr.’s friend, Mboya, had helped to rally pro-U.S. pan-African support for the CIA’s overthrow of Nkrumah in Ghana in 1966.

East-West Center, University of Hawaii, and CIA coup against Sukarno

Ann Dunham met Soetoro at the East-West Center at the University of Hawaii. The center had long been affiliated with CIA activities in the Asia-Pacific region. In 1965, the year that Dunham met and married Soetoro, the center saw a new chancellor take over. He was Howard P. Jones who served a record seven years, from 1958 to 1965, as U.S. ambassador to Indonesia. Jones was present in Jakarta as Suharto and his CIA-backed military officers planned the 1965 overthrow of Sukarno, who was seen, along with the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI), as allies of China.

When Jones was chancellor of the East-West Center, he wrote an article for the Washington Post, dated October 10, 1965, in which he defended Suharto’s overthrow of Sukarno. Jones was “invited” by the Post to comment on the Suharto coup, described as a “counter-coup” against the Communists. Jones charged that Suharto was merely responding to an earlier attempted Communist-led coup against Sukarno launched by Lt. Col. Untung, “a relatively unknown battalion commander in the palace guard.”

Jones’s article, which mirrored CIA situation reports from the U.S. embassy in Jakarta, continued by stating that the alleged leftist coup on September 30 ”came within an inch of succeeding through the assassination of six of the top military command. It might well have succeeded had not Defense Minister Nasution and a number of other senior generals also maked for assassination acted fast in a dramatic counter-coup.” Of course, what Jones did not inform the Post’s readers was that the Suharto “counter-coup” had been assisted with the strong help of the CIA.

Sukarno never blamed the Communists for the assassination of the army generals nor did the Indonesian Cabinet, where the second= and third-ranking leaders of the PKI were present. The possibility that the assassination of the generals was a CIA/Suharto “false flag” operation to affix blame on the PKI cannot be ruled out. Two days after Suharto’s coup, a CIA “rent-a-mob” burned down the PKI headquarters in Jakarta. As they marched past the U.S. Embassy, which was also the site of the CIA station, they yelled out, “Long live America!”

Untung later said that when he became aware that Suharto and the CIA were planning a coup on October 5, 1965 – Indonesian Armed Forces Day – forces loyal to him and Sukarno moved first. Jones described this as “typical Communist propaganda.” Suharto moved against Sukarno on October 1. Jones iterated that “there was not an iota of truth . . . in the accusation that the CIA was working against Sukarno.” History has proven otherwise. Jones accused the Communists of taking advantage of Sukarno’s failing health to beat out the other candidates to succeed him. The goal, according to Jones, was to have PKI boss D.N. Aidit succeed Sukarno. Sukarno did not die until 1970, while under house arrest.

A CIA paper, formerly classified Secret and undated, states “Sukarno would like to return to the status quo ante-coup. He has refused to condemn the PKI or the 30th September Movement [of Lt. Col. Untung]; instead, he calls for unity of Indonesia and asks that no vengeance be taken by one group against the other. But, he has not succeeded in forcing the Army to abandon its anti-PKI activities and, on the other hand, he has bowed to their demand by appointing its single candidate General Suharto as head of the Army.” Suharto and Barry Obama Soetoro’s step-father Lolo Soetoro would ignore Sukarno’s call for no vengeance, as hundreds of thousands of Indonesians would soon discover.

The mass murder by Suharto of Indonesian Chinese is seen in the CIA paper’s description of the Baperki Party: “the leftist Baperki Party, with its major strength in rural areas, is largely Chinese-Indonesian in membership.” A CIA Intelligence Memorandum, dated October 6, 1966 and formerly classified Secret, shows the extent of the CIA’s monitoring of the anti-Sukarno coup from various CIA agents assigned as liaisons to Suharto’s army units surrounding the Presidential Palace in Bogor and at various diplomatic posts around the country, including the U.S. Consulate in Medan, which was keeping track of leftists in that Sumatran city and, which, in an October 2, 1965, Intelligence Memo, reported to the CIA that the “Soviet consul-general in Medan has a plane standing by that could be used for evacuation of Soviet citizens from Sumatra.” The October 6 memo also warns against allowing Untung from developing a following in Central Java.

A CIA formerly Secret “Weekly Summary Special Report” on Indonesia, dated August 11, 1967, and titled “The New Order in Indonesia,” reports that in 1966, Indonesia re-aligned its economy in order to receive International Monetary Fund (IMF) assistance. The CIA reports its is happy with the new triumvirate ruling Indonesia in 1967: Suharto, Foreign Minister Adam Malik, and the Sultan of Jogjakarta, who served as minister for economics and finance. The report also rejoices in the outlawing of the PKI, but states it “retains a significant following in East and Central Java,” where Ann Dunham Soetoro would largely concentrate her later efforts on behalf of USAID, the World Bank, and the Ford Foundation, all front activities for the CIA to “win the hearts and minds” of the Javanese farmers and artisans.

A CIA Intelligence Memorandum, formerly Secret and dated July 23, 1966, clearly sees the Muslim Nahdatul Ulama party {NU), the largest party in Indonesia and Muslim, as a natural ally of the United States and the Suharto regime. The report states that helped Suharto put down the Communists in the post-coup time frame, especially where the NU was strongest: East Java, where Obama’s mother would concentrate her activities, and North Sumatra and parts of Borneo. An April 29, 1966, formerly Secret CIA Intelligence Memorandum on the PKI states: “Moslem extremists in many instances outdid the army in hunting down and murdering members of the party [PKI] and its front groups.”

Dunham and Barry Soetoro in Jakarta and USAID front activities

Dunham dropped out of the University of Hawaii in 1960 while pregnant with Barack Obama. Barack Obama Sr. left Hawaii in 1962 to study at Harvard. Dunham and Obama divorced in 1964. In the fall of 1961, Dunham enrolled at the University of Washington while caring for her infant son. Dunham was re-enrolled at the University of Hawaii from 1963 to 1966. Lolo Soetoro, who Dunham married in March 1965, departed Hawaii for Indonesia on July 20, 1965, some three months prior to the CIA’s coup against Sukarno. Soetoro, who served Suharto as an Army colonel, was clearly called back from the CIA-connected East-West Center to assist in the coup against Sukarno, one that would eventually cost the lives of some one million Indonesian citizens. It is a history that President Obama would like the press to ignore, which it certainly did during the 2008 primary and general election.

In 1967, after arriving in Indonesia with Obama, Jr., Dunham began teaching English at the American embassy in Jakarta, which also housed one of the largest CIA stations in Asia and had significant satellite stations in Surabaya in eastern Java and Medan on Sumatra. Jones left as East-West Center chancellor in 1968.

In fact, Obama’s mother was teaching English for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which was a major cover for CIA activities in Indonesia and throughout Southeast Asia, especially in Laos, South Vietnam, and Thailand. The USAID program was known as Lembaga Pendidikan Pembinaan Manajemen. Obama’s mother, painted as a free spirit and a “sixties child” by President Obama and people who claimed they knew her in Hawaii and Indonesia, had a curriculum vitae in Indonesia that contradicts the perception that Ann Dunham Soetoro was a “hippy.”

Dunham Soetoro’s Russian language training at the University of Hawaii may have been useful to the CIA in Indonesia. An August 2, 1966, formerly Secret memorandum from the National Security Council’s Executive Secretary Bromley Smith states that, in addition to Japan, Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, and the Philippines, the Suharto coup was welcomed by the Soviet Union and its Eastern European allies because its created a non-aligned Indonesia that “represents an Asian counterweight to Communist China.” Records indicate that a number of CIA agents posted in Jakarta before and after the 1965 coup were, like Dunham Soetoro, conversant in Russian.

Dunham Soetoro worked for the elitist Ford Foundation, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Bank Rakyat (the majority government-owned People’s Bank of Indonesia), and the CIA-linked USAID while she lived in Indonesia and later, Pakistan.

USAID was involved in a number of CIA covert operations in Southeast Asia. The February 9, 1971, Washington Star reported that USAID officials in Laos were aware that rice supplied to the Laotian Army by USAID was being re-sold to North Vietnamese army divisions in the country. The report stated that the U.S. tolerated the USAID rice sales to the North Vietnamese since the Laotian Army units that sold the rice found themselves protected from Communist Pathet Lao and North Vietnamese attack. USAID and the CIA also used the supply of rice to force Laotian Meo tribesmen to support the United States in the war against the Communists. USAID funds programmed for civilians injured in the war in Laos and public health care were actually diverted for military purposes.

In 1971, the USAID-funded Center for Vietnamese Studies at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale was accused of being a CIA front. USAID-funded projects through the Midwest Universities Consortium for International Activities (MUCIA) — comprising the Universities of Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana and Michigan State — were accused of being CIA front projects, including those for “agricultural education” in Indonesia, as well as other “projects” in Afghanistan, Mali, Nepal, Nigeria, Thailand, and South Vietnam. The charge was made in 1971, the same year that Ann Dunham was working for USAID in the country.

In a July 10, 1971, New York Times report, USAID and the CIA were accused of “losing” $1.7 billion appropriated for the Civil Operations and Revolutionary Development Support (CORDS) program in South Vietnam. CORDS was part of the CIA’s Operation Phoenix program, which involved CIA assassination and torture of South Vietnamese village elders and Buddhist clerics. USAID money was also directed to the CIA’s proprietary airline in Southeast Asia, Air America. In Thailand, USAID funds for the Accelerated Rural Development Program in Thailand were actually masking a CIA anti-Communist counter-insurgency operation. USAID funds programmed for public works projects in East Pakistan in 1971 were used for East Pakistan’s military fortifications on its border with India, in the months before the outbreak of war with India, in contravention of U.S. law that prohibited USAID money for military purposes.

In 1972, USAID administrator Dr. John Hannah admitted to Metromedia News that USAID was being used as a cover for CIA covert operations in Laos. Hannah only admitted to Laos as a USAID cover for the CIA. However, it was also reported that USAID was being used by the CIA in Indonesia, Philippines, South Vietnam, Thailand, and South Korea. USAID projects in Southeast Asia had to be approved by the Southeast Asian Development Advisory Group (SEADAG), an Asia Society group that was, in fact, answerable to the CIA.

The U.S. Food for Peace program, jointly administered by USAID and the Department of Agriculture, was found in 1972 to be used for military purposes in Cambodia, South Korea, Turkey, South Vietnam, Spain, Taiwan, and Greece. In 1972, USAID funneled aid money only to the southern part of North Yemen, in order to aid North Yemeni forces against the government of South Yemen, then ruled by a socialist government opposed to U.S. hegemony in the region.

One of the entities affiliated with the USAID work in Indonesia was the Asia Foundation, a 1950s creation formed with the help of the CIA to oppose the expansion of communism in Asia. The East-West Center guest house in Hawaii was funded by the Asia Foundation. The guest house is also where Barack Obama Sr. first stayed after his airlift from Kenya to Hawaii, arranged by the one of the CIA’s major agents of influence in Africa, Mboya.

Dunham would also travel to Ghana, Nepal, Bangladesh, India, and Thailand working on micro-financing projects. In 1965, Barack Obama Sr. returned to Kenya from Harvard, with another American wife. The senior Obama linked up with his old friend and the CIA’s “golden boy” Mboya and other fellow Luo politicians. The CIA station chief in Nairobi from 1964 to 1967 was Philip Cherry. In 1975, Cherry was the CIA station chief in Dacca, Bangladesh. Cherry was linked by the then-U.S. ambassador to Bangladesh, Eugene Booster, to the 1975 assassination of Bangladesh’s first president, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and members of his family.

The hit on “Sheikh Mujib” and his family was reportedly ordered by then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Bangladesh was also on the micro- and macro-financing travel itinerary of CIA-linked Ann Dunham.

 

CIA banking and Hawaii

Meanwhile, Dunham Soetoro’s mother, Madelyn Dunham, who raised young Obama when he returned to Hawaii in 1971 while his mother stayed in Indonesia, was the first female vice president at the Bank of Hawaii in Honolulu. Various CIA front entities used the bank. Madelyn Dunham handled escrow accounts used to make CIA payments to U.S.-supported Asian dictators like Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos, South Vietnamese President Nguyen van Thieu, and President Suharto in Indonesia. In effect, the bank was engaged in money laundering for the CIA to covertly prop up its favored leaders in the Asia-Pacific region.

One of the CIA’s major money laundering fronts in Honolulu was the firm of Bishop, Baldwin, Rewald, Dillingham & Wong (BBRDW). After the CIA allowed the firm to collapse in 1983 amid charges that BBRDW was merely a Ponzi scheme, Senator Daniel Inouye of the US Senate Intelligence Committee said the CIA’s role in the firm “wasn’t significant.” It would later be revealed that Inouye, who was one of the late Alaska Senator Ted Stevens’s best friends in the Senate, was lying. In fact, BBRDW was involved heavily in funding covert CIA programs throughout Asia, including economic espionage against Japan, providing arms for Afghan mujaheddin guerrillas in their war against the Soviets and covertly supplying weapons to Taiwan. One of BBRDW’s principals was John C. “Jack” Kindschi, who, before he retired in 1981, was the CIA station chief in Honolulu. BBRDW’s chairman Ron Rewald had a counterfeit college degree certificate provided for the wall of his office by the CIA’s forgery experts and his name was inserted in university records as an alumnus.

A false history for BBRDW was concocted by the CIA claiming the firm had operated in Hawaii since it was a territory. President Obama is currently plagued by allegations that he has fake college and university transcripts, a phony social security number issued in Connecticut, and other padded resume items. Did Hawaii’s fake BBRDW documents portend today’s questions about Obama’s past?

BBRDW conducted its business in the heart of Honolulu’s business district, where the Bank of Hawaii was located and where Obama grandmother Madelyn Dunham ran the escrow accounts. The bank would handle much of BBRDW’s covert financial transactions.

Obama/Soetoro and the “years of living dangerously” in Jakarta

It is clear that Dunham Soetoro and her Indonesian husband, President Obama’s step-father, were closely involved in the CIA’s operations to steer Indonesia away from the Sino-Soviet orbit during the “years of living dangerously” after the overthrow of Sukarno. WMR has discovered that some of the CIA’s top case officers were assigned to various official and non-official cover assignments in Indonesia during this time frame, including under the cover of USAID, the Peace Corps, and the U.S. Information Agency (USIA).

One of the closest CIA contacts for Suharto was former CIA Jakarta embassy officer Kent B. Crane. Crane was so close to Suharto after “retiring” from the CIA, he was reportedly one of the only “private” businessmen given an Indonesian diplomatic passport by Suharto’s government. Crane’s company, the Crane Group, was involved in supplying small arms to the military forces of the United States, Indonesia, and other nations. A foreign policy adviser to Vice President Spiro Agnew, Crane was later nominated as U.S. ambassador to Indonesia by President Ronald Reagan but the nomination was dead-on-arrival because of Crane’s dubious links to Suharto. The ambassadorship would instead go to John Holdridge, a close colleague of Kissinger. Holdridge was succeeded in Jakarta by Paul Wolfowitz.

Suharto’s cronies, who included Mochtar and James Riady of the Lippo Group, would later stand accused of funneling over $1 million of illegal foreign contributions to Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign.

President Obama has twice postponed official state visits to Indonesia, perhaps fearful of the attention such a trip would bring to the CIA connections of his mother and Indonesian step-father.

In the 1970s and 80s, Dunham was active in micro-loan projects for the Ford Foundation, the CIA-linked East-West Center, and USAID in Indonesia. One of the individuals assigned to the U.S. embassy and helped barricade the compound during a violent anti-U.S. student demonstration during the 1965 Suharto coup against Sukarno was Dr. Gordon Donald, Jr. Assigned to the embassy’s Economic Section, Donald was responsible for USAID micro-financing for Indonesian farmers, the same project that Dunham Soetoro would work on for USAID in the 1970s, after her USAID job of teaching English in Indonesia. In a 1968 book, “Who’s Who in the CIA,” published in West Berlin, Donald is identified as a CIA officer who was also assigned to Lahore, Pakistan, where Dunham would eventually live for five years in the Hilton International Hotel while working on microfinancing for the Asian Development Bank.

Another “Who’s Who in the CIA” Jakarta alumnus is Robert F. Grealy, who later became the director for international relations for the Asia-Pacific for J P Morgan Chase and a director for the American-Indonesian Chamber of Commerce. J P Morgan Chase’s CEO Jamie Dimon is being mentioned as a potential replacement for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, whose father, Peter Geithner, was the Ford Foundation’s Asia grant-selector who funneled the money to Ann Dunham’s Indonesian projects.

CIA Black Projects and Hawaii

While in Pakistan, Dunham’s son Barack visited her in 1980 and 1981. Obama visited Karachi, Lahore, and Hyderabad, India during his south Asia visits. It was during the time period that the CIA was beefing up its anti-Soviet operations in Afghanistan from Pakistan.

A January 31, 1958, heavily-redacted formerly Secret NOFORN [no foreign dissemination] memorandum for CIA Director Allen Dulles from the Deputy Assistant Director of the CIA for Research and Reports [name redacted] reports on a fact-finding mission to the Far East, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East from November 17 through December 21, 1957.

The CIA Office of Research and Reports (ORR) chief reports a meeting with the staff of retired Army General Jesmond Balmer, a senior CIA official in Hawaii, about requests by the Commander-in-Chief Pacific (CINCPAC) for “a number of detailed, time-consuming research studies.” The ORR chief then reports about a CIA “survey of students at the University of Hawaii who have both Chinese language and research ability.” The ORR chief also reports that at a South-East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) Counter Subversion Seminar at Baguio, Philippines held from November 26-29, 1957, the Economic Subcommittee discussed an “economic development fund” to combat “Sino-Soviet Bloc subversive activities in the area and a consideration of possible counter-measures which might be employed.”

The Thailand and Philippines delegations were pushing hard for U.S. funding for an economic development fund, which may have provided the impetus for later USAID projects in the region, including those with which Peter Geithner and Obama’s mother were intimately involved.

Although CIA geo-political covert operations at the University of Hawaii are well-documented, the agency’s darker side of research and MK-UKTRA type operations has not generally been associated with the University of Hawaii.

A series of formerly Confidential CIA memoranda, dated May 15, 1972, points to the involvement of both the Defense Department’s Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), the CIA, and the University of Hawaii in the CIA’s behavioral science program. The memos are signed by then-Deputy Director of the CIA Bronson Tweedy, the chief of the Intelligence Community’s Program Review Group (PRG) [name redacted], and CIA Director Richard Helms. The subject of the memos is “ARPA Supported Research Relating to Intelligence Product,” The memo from the PRG chief discusses a conference held on May 11, 1972, attended by Lt. Col. Austin Kibler, ARPA’s Director of Behavioral Research. Kibler was the chief for ARPA research into behavior modification and remote viewing. Others mentioned in the PRG chief’s memo include CIA Deputy Director for Intelligence Edward Proctor, the CIA Deputy Director for Science and Technology Carl Duckett, and Director of the Office of National Estimates John Huizenga.

In 1973, after CIA Director James Schlesinger ordered a review of all CIA programs, the CIA developed a set of documents on various CIA programs collectively called the “Family Jewels.” Most of these documents were released in 2007 but it was also revealed that Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, the CIA’s director of MKULTRA, the agency’s behavior modification, brainwashing, and drug testing component, had been ordered by Helms, before he resigned as CIA director, to be destroyed. Duckett, in one memo from Ben Evans of the CIA to CIA Director William Colby, dated May 8, 1973, conveys that he “thinks the Director would be ill-advised to say he is acquainted with this program,” meaning Gottlieb’s drug testing program under MKULKTRA.

Senior Gerald Ford administration officials, including Chief of Staff Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, ensured that after the production of the “Family Jewels” documents, no CIA revelations were made about CIA psychological behavior-altering programs, including MKULTRA and Project ARTICHOKE.

The May 15, 1972, set of memos appears to be related to the CIA’s initial research, code named SCANATE, in 1972 into psychic warfare, including the use of psychics for purposes of remote viewing espionage and mind control. The memo discussed Kibler from ARPA and “his contractor,” which was later discovered to be Stanford Research Institute (SRI) in Menlo Park, California.

In a memo from CIA Director Helms to, among others, Duckett, Huizenga, Proctor, and the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, which later inherited reote viewing from the CIA under the code name GRILL FLAME, Helms insists that ARPA had been supporting research into behavioral science and its potential for intelligence production ”for a number of years” at “M.I.T., Yale, the University of Michigan, U.C.L.A., and University of Hawaii and other institutions as well as in corporate research facilities.”

The role of the University of Hawaii in CIA psych-war operations continues to this day. The chief of research for DIA’s Defense Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center (DCHC) Behavioral Sciences Program, Dr. Susan Brandon, who was reportedly involved in a covert program run by the American Psychological Association (APA), Rand Corporation, and the CIA to employ “enhanced interrogation” techniques, including sleep and sensory deprivation, intense pain, and extreme isolation on prisoners held at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan and other “black prisons,” received her PhD in Psychology from the University of Hawaii. Brandon also served as assistant director of Social, Behavioral, and Educational Sciences for the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the George W. Bush White House.

The CIA’s close connections to the University of Hawaii continued to the late 1970s, when the former President of the University of Hawaii from 1969 to 1974, Harlan Cleveland, was a special invited speaker at CIA headquarters on May 10, 1977. Cleveland served as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs from 1961 to 1965 and Lyndon Johnson’s ambassador to NATO from 1965 to 1969 before taking up his position at the University of Hawaii.

A CIA Director of Training memo dated May 21, 1971, reports on the active recruitment of a U.S. Marine officer who was entering graduate school at the University of Hawaii.

The Family of Obama and the CIA

There are volumes of written material on the CIA backgrounds of George H. W. Bush and CIA-related activities by his father and children, including former President George W. Bush. Barack Obama, on the other hand, cleverly masked his own CIA connections as well as those of his mother, father, step-father, and grandmother (there is very little known about Obama’s grandfather, Stanley Armour Dunham, who was supposedly in the furniture business in Hawaii after serving in Europe during World War II). Presidents and vice presidents do not require security background checks, unlike other members of the federal government, to hold office. That job is left up to the press. In 2008, the press failed miserably in its duty to vet the man who would win the White House. With the ties of Obama’s parents to the University of Hawaii and its links to MKULTRA and ARTICHOKE, a nagging question remains: Is Barack Obama a real-life “Manchurian Candidate?”

(Continued below)

SPECIAL REPORT: The Story of Obama All in the Company – Add one more Obama family member to the CIA payroll. Part III

WMR previously reported on the CIA links of President Obama’s mother, father, step-father, grandmother to the CIA. Not much is known about Obama’s grandfather, Stanley Armour Dunham, who Obama mistakenly referred to as “his father” in two speeches, one recently to the Disabled American Veterans.

What is officially known about Stanley Armour Dunham is that he served with the 9th Air Force in Britain and France prior to and after the D-Day invasion. After the war, Dunham and his wife, Madelyn and his daughter Stanley Ann — Obama’s mother — moved to Berkeley, California; El Dorado, Kansas; Seattle; and Honolulu. Armour Dunham is said to have worked for a series of furniture stores.

Obama maintains that his mother and father first met in a Russian-language class at the University of Hawaii in 1959. However, a photograph has emerged of Stanley Armour welcoming Barack Obama, Sr., complete with traditional Hawaiian welcoming leis, from Kenya. Obama, Sr. was the only Kenyan student airlifted to Hawaii as part of the CIA-inspired Airlift Africa project that saw Obama and 279 other students from British eastern and southern African colonies brought to the United States for college degrees prior to their homelands gaining independence from Britain. The students were selected by Kenyan nationalist leader Tom Mboya who would later conduct surveillance for the CIA at pan-African nationalist meetings. Mboya was particularly focused on two African leaders who were seen as too close to the Sino-Soviet bloc, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana and Sekout Toure of Guinea.

Stanley Armour Dunham with Barack Obama, Sr. at welcoming ceremony to Hawaii. The presence of two US Navy personnel indicates the plane may have landed at Hickam Air Force Base, an indication of the U.S. government’s and CIA’s role in the Airlift Africa project.

The photograph of Armour Dunham with Barack Obama, Sr., indicates that the “furniture salesman” in Hawaii was, in fact, working with a CIA-funded project to rapidly educate aspiring politicians to serve in post-independence African governments to counter Soviet- and Chinese-backed political leaders in the region.

There is a strong reason to believe that Armour Dunham worked in the 1950s for the CIA in the Middle East. An FBI file on Armour Dunham existed but the bureau claimed it destroyed the file on May 1, 1997. Considering the sour relations between the FBI and CIA during the Cold War, it is likely that Armour Dunham was being monitored by FBI director J. Edgar Hoover in the same manner as a number of other CIA officials and agents were being surveilled. Similarly, the pre-1968 passport records of Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, were destroyed by the State Department.

There is a photographic clue that the Dunhams may have been assigned by the CIA to Beirut, Lebanon in the early 1950s. A photograph of Obama’s mother and grandparents has emerged that shows Stanley Ann Dunham wearing what may be a school uniform with the insignia of “NdJ,” which stands for the College Notre-Dame de Jamhour, a private Jesuit Catholic French language school in Beirut, Lebanon. Graduates of the school include three former presidents of Lebanon, Amine Gemayel, Bashir Gemayel, and Charles Helou, all of whom maintained close relations with Washington.

Did Obama’s mother [left] go to a private school in Lebanon in the early 1950s while her father [middle] worked for the CIA in Beirut?

There is also the curious nature of President Obama’s Social Security Number, issued in Connecticut, a state where there is no other evidence of his ever being a resident. Adding to the mystery is a New York City address for a “male” named Stanley Ann Dunham, 235 E. 40th St Apt 8F, New York NY 10016-1747. The address is a few blocks away from the address of the Ford Foundation. Ann Dunham did work briefly in New York for the Ford Foundation.

On August 9, 2010, WMR reported, “In a December 19, 1971, article in the Boston Globe by Dan Pinck, [a historian and former OSS officer] titled ‘Is everyone in the CIA?’ it is alleged that identifying US Agency for International Development (USAID) officers as CIA agents was a ‘reasonably accurate accounting of certain leading operatives and associates of the CIA.’ President Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro worked for USAID in rural Java in Indonesia. Pinck’s article was a review of a 1968 book, ‘Who’s Who in the CIA’ published in Berlin.”

WMR has obtained a rare copy of “Who’s Who in the CIA,” from England. The book, published in West Berlin in 1968, lists some 3,000 CIA agents and agents-of-influence around the world.

The book also contains a reference to one CIA operative whose area of primary place of operation was Mercer Island, Washington. He was retired Air Force General Don Zabriskie Zimmermann, who was the Chief Engineer for the Boeing Company in Seattle. Before retiring from the Air Force, Zimmermann was the Air Force Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Development in Foreign Countries. Ann Stanley Dunham reportedly graduated from Mercer Island High School in 1960 and met Obama later that year in a Russian language class after her parents moved to Hawaii. Stanley Ann’s mother, Madelyn Dunham, worked at a Boeing plant in Wichita, Kansas during World War II.

The book lists the number of CIA agents in countries during the 1950s and 60s where Obama’s father, mother, step-father Lolo Soetori, and allegedly, his grandmother and grandfather worked:

Indonesia

Jakarta 64

Surabaya 12

Medan 8

Hollandia 1

Kenya

Nairobi 19

Mombassa 2

Lebanon

Beirut 61 (including one agent also assigned to Jakarta, Lahore, and Karachi and another assigned to Lahore)

Hawaii

Honolulu 6 (one agent also assigned to Canton Island and another was fluent in French, Stanley Ann Dunham spoke French, Urdu, Bahasa Indonesian, and she studied Javanese at the University of Hawaii, in addition to Russian).

— Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. He has written for several renowned papers and blogs.

Madsen is a regular contributor on Russia Today. He has been a frequent political and national security commentator on Fox News and has also appeared on ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, and MS-NBC. Madsen has taken on Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity on their television shows. He has been invited to testifty as a witness before the US House of Representatives, the UN Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and an terrorism investigation panel of the French government.

As a U.S. Naval Officer, he managed one of the first computer security programs for the U.S. Navy. He subsequently worked for the National Security Agency, the Naval Data Automation Command, Department of State, RCA Corporation, and Computer Sciences Corporation.

Madsen is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), Association for Intelligence Officers (AFIO), and the National Press Club. 

 

Imperial Intervention

 

Obama to the nation: Onward civilian soldiers

January 31st, 2012 by

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-follows-the-progressive-presidents-model-of-martial-language/2012/01/27/gIQAcobPWQ_story.html

By George F. Will, Published: January 27

Posted by Dutchman6 on http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/

War, said James Madison, is “the true nurse of executive aggrandizement.” Randolph Bourne, the radical essayist killed by the influenza unleashed by World War I, warned, “War is the health of the state.” Hence Barack Obama’s State of the Union hymn: Onward civilian soldiers, marching as to war.

Obama, an unfettered executive wielding a swollen state, began and ended his address by celebrating the armed forces. They are not “consumed with personal ambition,” they “work together” and “focus on the mission at hand” and do not “obsess over their differences.” Americans should emulate troops “marching into battle,” who “rise or fall as one unit.”

Well. The armed services’ ethos, although noble, is not a template for civilian society, unless the aspiration is to extinguish politics. People marching in serried ranks, fused into a solid mass by the heat of martial ardor, proceeding in lock step, shoulder to shoulder, obedient to orders from a commanding officer — this is a recurring dream of progressives eager to dispense with tiresome persuasion and untidy dissension in a free, tumultuous society.

Progressive presidents use martial language as a way of encouraging Americans to confuse civilian politics with military exertions, thereby circumventing an impediment to progressive aspirations — the Constitution and the patience it demands. As a young professor, Woodrow Wilson had lamented that America’s political parties “are like armies without officers.” The most theoretically inclined of progressive politicians, Wilson was the first president to criticize America’s founding. This he did thoroughly, rejecting the Madisonian system of checks and balances — the separation of powers, a crucial component of limited government — because it makes a government that cannot be wielded efficiently by a strong executive.

Franklin Roosevelt agreed. He complained about “the three-horse team of the American system”: “If one horse lies down in the traces or plunges off in another direction, the field will not be plowed.” And progressive plowing takes precedence over constitutional equipoise among the three branches of government. Hence FDR’s attempt to break the Supreme Court to his will by enlarging it.

In his first inaugural address, FDR demanded “broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe.” He said Americans must “move as a trained and loyal army” with “a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife.” The next day, addressing the American Legion, Roosevelt said it was “a mistake to assume that the virtues of war differ essentially from the virtues of peace.” In such a time, dissent is disloyalty.

Yearnings for a command society were common and respectable then. Commonweal, a magazine for liberal Catholics, said that Roosevelt should have “the powers of a virtual dictatorship to reorganize the government.” Walter Lippmann, then America’s preeminent columnist, said: “A mild species of dictatorship will help us over the roughest spots in the road ahead.” The New York Daily News, then the nation’s largest-circulation newspaper, cheerfully editorialized: “A lot of us have been asking for a dictator. Now we have one. ... It is Roosevelt. . . . Dictatorship in crises was ancient Rome’s best era.” The New York Herald Tribune titled an editorial “For Dictatorship if Necessary.”

Obama, aspiring to command civilian life, has said that in reforming health care, he would have preferred an “elegant, academically approved” plan without “legislative fingerprints on it” but “unfortunately” he had to conduct “negotiations with a lot of different people.” His campaign mantra “We can’t wait!” expresses progressivism’s impatience with our constitutional system of concurrent majorities. To enact and execute federal laws under Madison’s institutional architecture requires three, and sometimes more, such majorities. There must be majorities in the House and Senate, each body having distinctive constituencies and electoral rhythms. The law must be affirmed by the president, who has a distinctive electoral base and election schedule. Supermajorities in both houses of Congress are required to override presidential vetoes. And a Supreme Court majority is required to sustain laws against constitutional challenges.

“We can’t wait!” exclaims Obama, who makes recess appointments when the Senate is not in recess, multiplies “czars” to further nullify the Senate’s constitutional prerogative to advise and consent, and creates agencies (e.g., Obamacare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board and Dodd-Frank’sConsumer Financial Protection Bureau) untethered from legislative accountability.

Like other progressive presidents fond of military metaphors, he rejects the patience of politics required by the Constitution he has sworn to uphold.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

For a more erudite presentation of what is going through my mind, let me begin by quoting E.G. Vibes “Peaceful Politics Part 1”

“In republics we are forced to put our trust in representatives who don’t have our best interests in mind, while in democracies we are subject to the whims of the majority, and these whims are of course controlled and manipulated by those in society who have the most control and influence.  It seems that either way, the average people really don’t have a say in what happens in their society and they are typically subject to various forms of oppression that are justified by the state.

Oftentimes the debate arises, is America a republic or a democracy?  I would argue that it has been a little bit of both, as I’m guessing this is where the “republican” and “democrat” branches come from.  In reality our form of government has properties of both a republic and a democracy.  Sadly, when we look at the government today, we can say that we unfortunately end up with the worst of both worlds.

Why is it that these systems both fail to protect the rights of the people?  Because both systems give certain groups of people authority over other groups of people and both systems allow that privileged group to initiate force without consequence.  In a republic the privileged group is the representative, while in a direct democracy the privileged group is the mob and the aristocrats who manipulate the mob through media and rhetoric.

Let’s start with the democratic system of government.  At face value this system sounds great, holding votes and getting everyone involved in the society is a wonderful thing.  However, this form of government is extremely corruptible, which is why it is praised by aristocrats and bureaucrats alike.  Even in a pure system of direct democracy where there are no politicians, the citizens are still vulnerable to being manipulated into making decisions that are against their best interests.  Likewise, those who happen to disagree with the whims of the majority are subject to the tyranny of the mob, which is why direct democracy is sometimes called mob rule.

A republic is put forth as an alternative to this system.  In theory, a republic offers “representatives”, which are people who are said to be selected in order to preserve the rights of the people.  Apparently, these “representatives” are given the power to direct the course of civilization in order to protect the rights of the minority from tyranny of the majority.  Unfortunately, this never happens because republics are extremely easy to corrupt, due to the fact that so much power is concentrated in so few hands and the ability that those in power have to commit crimes and get away with them.

Even if the founders of a country and the first few generations of rulers are the epitome of moral virtue, eventually a psychopath will come along and grant himself powers and immunities, that all future psychopaths will further exploit, until the whole system is eventually corrupted and filled with psychopaths.

This is nothing new, this has happened constantly throughout history, all the way from the ancient Greek and Roman empires to every society that has attempted to replicate these systems.  In fact, these ancient societies are the root of this age-old argument between republics and democracies, with the republic being represented by Rome and democracy being represented by Greece.  If we bring this argument into the context of these ancient empires we will find that this debate is really a comparison of the aristocratic forms of government that failed in Rome and Greece thousands of years ago.  Each of these cultures had a tradition of slave-owning and subjugation, so although they were starting to scratch the surface of ideas like autonomy and liberty, their actions showed that they had a very primitive level of respect for human life and the values of non-aggression.

There is no reason why our understanding of political philosophy needs to be stuck in the ancient world, when we have advanced and progressed in nearly every other aspect of our development.  For us to truly become a civilized society, ideas like authority, justified sinning and subjective standards must be left behind and associated with oppressive traditions of our past like cultural slavery and arranged marriages, for example.  A civilized society does not solve their problems with weapons and cages, so until we learn our way out of this and discover a new way of doing business, we really cannot say that our world is civilized.

Since we have explored the violent aspects of these control systems it is now important for us to recognize how these ideas are truly obsessive compulsive and utopian in nature.

The state of our civilization is absolutely abysmal, so it really is not too unreasonable to suggest that we need a whole new way of doing business, a whole new way of structuring our society that has yet to be attempted.  As Einstein noted the definition of insanity should be “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.  With that being said, how insane is it that our species has attempted to recreate the same failed civilizations time and time again.  Yet unfortunately, whenever someone suggests that we take a new approach at organizing our society, they are the ones who are called insane, or at very least “utopian”.

The whole idea behind a “utopia” is to create a perfect society.  This sounds great and all, but history has shown us that all attempts to create a utopia have come at very high costs and have been riddled with violence.  In short, things have been forced.  It seems that the path to the promised land has always been littered with corpses because those in power have insisted on using violence and subjugation to force their will onto the rest of the population, in failed attempts to create what they felt the ideal society would be.  If anything, I would argue that our society is currently operating according to a utopian perspective.  It is idealistic and perfectionistic to think that a small portion of society is capable of creating a world of peace and freedom, by committing acts of violence, making threats and imposing laws that they themselves refuse to follow.

What we have now, and what has come before us, that is utopian.  To suggest that a more peaceful way of doing things would bring about a better society that on the other hand is not utopian. Of course, this is not how we are taught to look at things through the media and government schooling.  Through these channels we are led to believe that society as it is right now is pinnacle of human achievement, and to think otherwise is unrealistic, idealistic, utopian, or even “extreme”.

I guarantee you, that the day before slavery was outlawed, there were slave owners claiming that it was absolutely impossible for the slaves to be free.  Sadly, the majority of the slaves actually believed this lie, or else they would have long since overran the plantations and declared their own freedom.  This is because in every case of subjugation throughout history, the oppressors have depended on various forms of mental coercion to exploit their neighbors.  The threat of violence simply is not enough to make people submit to authority, therefore those in authority create philosophies that justify the needless suffering that the majority of society is forced to endure.

OLDDOG CONTINUES

Every since the day I learned that the constitution did not release us from economic bondage to The International Investment Bankers, England, and the Vatican, My mind has been in a turmoil, wrestling with patriotic loyalty to the Constitution, and the shear impossibility of our government ever doing what we expected of them. Our government has Never Done Its Job as we were told it should.

The atrocities that American’s and other Nations have endured from the constant wars and theft of our money and freedoms is beyond comprehension. We must become capable of doing better at preserving our freedoms or we will soon be absolute slaves with no possibility of a return to freedom.

Therefore, it seems prudent that we find men capable of assessing the situation, and making suggestions on how to start over with a new Constitution that makes it impossible for politicians to deviate from its chains. When I consider how we have been brainwashed from childhood to accept these atrocities and remain loyal to a system that has NEVER worked, it makes me wonder if humanity is worth saving.

On my more positive days the rage against tyranny in government strengthens me, and I find myself trying to do something the Lord did not see fit to equip me for, and then I fall right back into this intellectual vacuum that humiliates me into depression. This is not how any thinking human being should have to live their life. Where the hell are those intellectual giants that can correct this unbearable cluster fuck?

There are times when the writings of Thomas Jefferson inspire me to great emotion, and admiration of him, but then reality sets in and I consider this! How was it possible for a man with his intellect to participate in a government that he knew full well was doomed to fail, as history authenticates. He had to have known that a Republic that was FINANCIALLY OBLIGATED TO OTHERS and dependent on honest politicians would fail, and yet he fought for it with all his strength.

On further consideration of Amos 3:3 “Can two walk together , unless they are agreed?” I despair of humanity ever being capable of enough unity to govern them selves without subjecting some to force, which brings me to the one thought that will not go away.

Why not itemize the political concepts so the masses can understand them and then divide their-selves into like minded communities and choose their own brand of government , or no government at all; that would take only one universal law to produce peace. When you cross this line, you obey our rules and you won’t get back home in one piece if you don’t. Intelligent men call this secession, and tried it once, but the forces of evil were to well financed to overcome.

SECESSION IS HUMANITIES LAST CHANCE!

And many will have to die to obtain it!

 

Totalitarianism

 

Roadmap to Redressing Economic Terrorism in America

January 29th, 2012 by

 

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/01/28/heres-the-deal-fixing-america/

 

by  Gordon Duff,  Senior Editor

 

When the Cold War ended, a secret fund planned for by President Ronald Reagan had been set aside to rebuild America, pay off the national debt and reward Americans for decades of sacrifice. 

This was the real accomplishment of his presidency, one few knew of. 

As the funds finally came together, during the first years of the Clinton administration, instead of going to America, the man chosen to secure this legacy for America was put in a Swiss dungeon, then a mental hospital and eventually railroaded into prison on charges now admitted to have been “manufactured.”

Of the funds, only $4.5 trillion remain (plus interest, less taxes), belonging to Ameritrust Corporation, held for the American people.  This is some of the story of those funds and continuing attempts by politicians and bankers to continue destroying the United States through economic terrorism.

 

Many who read this will already know part of the story, some were involved, I am sure, in related operations.  I am part of that group.  The facts, documents, secret operations carefully vetted, confirmed, all now ready for release to those cleared for such, others are public domain.

It is our job to put out a story we are largely unauthorized to tell.

Of those who work in Special Operations and such things, I am one of the very few with a background in international finance.  This is not written for public consumption but I will publish it anyway, do with it as you will.  I am writing to our “community.”  You know who you are.

 

Whose Money Were They Lending? – Stolen Money?

Over the past few years, amounts of money and practices none of us had imagined have been hitting the news.

We hear one day that the Federal Reserve secretly lends out trillions of dollars illegally, yet these criminal acts by the Federal Reserve, though reported, are never investigated.

In fact, there is no agency empowered to audit or control the Federal Reserve whose very existence itself no one understands and, if they did, none would approve of.

It doesn’t say whose dollars or where they went or what America got in return.  We are led to believe they came out of thin air, went to places that are “none of our business” and were or were not paid back, also none of our business.

What happened? America got screwed.

Years ago, I had been asked to look after a former Reagan official named Lee Wanta.  Some of you will understand this sentence, who does the asking, and what “look after” means.

I knew he had been kidnapped in Switzerland and, though a diplomat, sent to the US and imprisoned on criminal charges we knew to be a total invention.

His personal attorney was Chief Legal Counsel for the Central Intelligence Agency.

My retiree job is as an intelligence contractor working with pro-US clients.  I “brief,” not interview.  I am not a journalist by trade.  I am one of the thousands of Americans that middle age has turned from a “knock in the back of the head” guy to someone who can talk his way out of a dozen foreign jails.

I am simply one of many Americans that few know exist, a Marine, a Vietnam veteran and someone who spent much of his life with his head upside down.

What Happened to Lee Wanta Actually Happened to All Americans

 

Who Stole the Money – And Who Did They Steal it For?

Ambassador Wanta has court documentation that he is owed $7.2 trillion dollars, private capital designated for one purpose, rebuilding the American economy.

The money was garnered through exploiting insane errors in the pricing of currencies and exploiting the economic policies of the former Soviet Union. Some of the profits had ended up in the Bank of China and were, according to legal agreement, repatriated to the United States, what remained anyway.

Initially, $4.5 trillion was transferred to the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond while issues of law and taxes were negotiated.  This is the remainder of a larger fund, transferred into the US while litigation was to determine tax liability and little else.

Secretly, a group of individuals has been using and diverting these funds.

Why does the fund exist?  Wanta worked for Reagan, National Intelligence Coordinator and then was nominated by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa at Reagan’s request to take over as Inspector General of the Department of Defense.

Instead, Reagan assigned Wanta to a project to raise huge amounts of money trading currency.  Some of this is on the internet and much of it is correct.  The total amount raised, based on collateral supplied by the US Department of Treasury in a secret intelligence operation was 27 trillion USD.

Over the years, all but $4.5 trillion was stolen, much of it by a previous US president, some by the CIA, much by banks.  Years ago, I was sent account numbers on some of the money and tried to locate it in concert with foreign intelligence agencies. 

I would have returned the funds to the US government.  Included is 2000 tons of gold, and dozens of bank accounts around the world.  I have the account numbers, talked to the bankers and even, in one case, went directly to a chief of state.

 

What Has Been Stolen by the MegaCrooks is Beyond Imagination

Stolen cash is impossible to recover when half of it is paid out in bribes. As most of what I am writing is probably classified, let’s pretend I am making this all up.

Anyway, back to Wanta.  During this time, Wanta had gone to court to recover his funds, which had grown to over $7 trillion.

The rest of the money, much of which came from currency trading at the largest scale in world history, we will never find.

Now a court has ordered Wanta to receive his money.

The company to receive the money is Ameritrust.  The board members of Ameritrust are well known public people, a former Vice President, senators, generals and admirals and, of course, me.

The money is, officially, in the Federal Bank of Richmond and the order to return the funds was signed by the President of the United States based on an agreement with the Federal Courts.

Involved, over a period of years, is a group of people every American will know, from presidents and vice presidents to the heads of the Federal Reserve, Secretaries of Treasury, names like Bush and Cheney, Paulson, Bernake, Al Gore, some names working for America and too many trying to steal part of the money for themselves.

(Fax header from “deep cover” classified memo directly to President Bush)

 

When you heard news stories about the Federal Reserve making secret loans to the crooked ”bail out banks” that weren’t authorized by congress, they were lending out the $7.2 trillion “Wanta dollars” ordered paid by President Obama and the Federal Courts.

If you wondered how the Federal Reserve, that couldn’t print a few billion dollars without authorization from congress, lent out trillions that technically didn’t exist with no permission at all and there was no investigation, no questions asked and the story forgotten a day later, you will begin to understand by the end of this.

You will be extremely upset and angry also.

Thus far, here is part of that settlement I can tell you of but first, I had Wanta checked out.

To do that, I went to a top army intelligence officer from the Pentagon, one who had been Defense Attache to Israel and who had worked in Special Operations, war plans, clandestine operations and such since he was an A Team leader in Vietnam. I put him on with Wanta for hours and had Wanta interrogated.

Wanta knew dozens of the highest classified operations in US history, knew every Pentagon official including much highly detailed personal information. To our top Army intelligence officer, we were able to confirm that he was, unquestioningly, working for years at the highest levels of US intelligence.

The man who grilled him still hangs up the phone whenever I mention 9/11, a close personal friend of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

This is the deal:

Ameritrust agrees to buy $1 trillion in 10 year treasury bonds, which will finance America’s national debt for the next year.

Ameritrust, as outlined by the court, agrees to pay $1.7 trillion in income tax, reducing the national debt significantly overnight.

Ameritrust has set aside $6 billion for disbursement, under my advisement, monies for two purposes:

1.     Development of a program to end veteran homelessness and save a generation of young veterans.  This is entirely privately donated money.  A non-profit entity exists and programs can start today.  Not one cent will be stolen or diverted.

2.     Fund efforts to aid in closing the US border and put a 100% end to illegal immigration and drug trafficking.  This involves billions of dollars, carefully administered, with the full cooperation of state and local officials who have already been consulted and are onboard.

Ameritrust has set aside, minimally, $1 trillion USD to build a high speed rail system for the United States with almost all components domestically constructed.  This system includes stations, hotels and much more.  The minimal impact will include:

1.     Initial employment will begin at 80,000 with full employment in the manufacture, installation and security of this system 400,000 new jobs, all privately financed without one cent of taxpayer money.

2.     Veterans will receive preference on all jobs but, as is obvious, employment goes well beyond our available veteran community.

3.     Required technologies and the entities that control such will be purchased and manufacturing facilities will be located within the United States.

The economic impact on other transportation systems, particularly airlines, has been predicted and funding is available to minimize disruption.

America, of course, will become the world’s tourist destination, travel costs for top domestic destinations will lower by a minimum of $65% and no debt will be involved.

Four hundred thousand paychecks will put a dent in the recession the recession, produce tax revenue to allow additional pay down of national debt and, for the first time in decades, actually raise the standard of living in America.

This is all documented.

Studies showing lowered emissions and freedom from oil imports are almost frightening.

All this does, of course, is give Americans things that other nations around the world have had for years but at lower cost, financed through the foresight, frankly, of President Ronald Reagan.

 

This entire project was his plan. He entrusted the currency trading critical part of it to Lee Wanta, who some now considered the greatest intelligence coup of the Cold War.  I had no idea.

That we are dealing with it now is because criminal elements within our government and financial industry including the Federal Reserve System have subverted this plan, ignored court orders and violated so many laws we can’t even count. They believe they can claim immunity and hide behind an national security justification.

This money is here today, it is 20 years old, it requires no new currency issue, it pays down debt and adds nothing but jobs, revenue and hope.

To stop this from moving forward, Wanta was kidnapped and jailed, court cases involving the top lawyers in the United States have gone on for 6 years and millions have been spent to either keep this out of the press or misrepresent facts that exist on enough legal documents to fill a Fed Ex van.

 

More than that, laws of diplomatic privilege have been violated and, a more serious security threat, Wanta was protected by federal statutes that protect intelligence agents, statutes misused by Oliver North and others, in this case, were as though they never existed.

Laws meant to protect America are now laws of convenience, used when they serve the banks or own our politicians, violated when patriots need to be silenced.

At one point, Wanta was put in a mental institution.  He gave the psychiatrist a telephone number to call.  Vice President Al Gore answered and confirmed Wanta’s identity.

Vice President Gore also confirmed that he had been informed that Lee Wanta was dead.  When Gore learned Wanta was alive in the room, we suspect this is why Wanta is here and the Reagan/Ameritrust program is coming back to life.

The psychiatrist ordered Wanta’s release.  Instead of release, he was jailed and the psychiatrist “warned” and then fired. We can prove this.

You have heard these stories a dozen times, Sibel Edmonds, John Wheeler III, Susan Lindauer and a hundred names you will never hear.  Ask why Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota and his family are dead.

This is the real world we live in, why we pay so much for gas when the world money markets have crashed, when demand is nothing but prices rise daily and nobody ever asks anything.

We Want to Know

What we want to know and “we” is not a harmless bunch of cranks.  “We” means many of the people who formerly and currently represent key “capabilities” that protect and defend the United States.

We want to know why, for years, the Federal Reserve illegally “loaned” trillions of dollars to banks that claimed they were insolvent, money in escrow and not under their authority for distribution.

We want to know why, for years, the Secretaries of Treasury authorized these illegal acts which have been reported in the news but never investigated.

We want to know where the trillions of dollars are in profits that were generated by using this currency to collateralize offshore transactions never listed by the banks who received the illegal loans.

Read that one again until you understand the extent of what I am saying and how obvious all of this is.

The money has been there to put America on her feet. Nobody ever explained how the Federal Reserve could lend trillions of dollars “illegally,” money never under their official control but rather under the supervision of the Federal District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia.

In addition to funding existing legal authorities to end illegal immigration overnight and begin a real war on drug trafficking, at some point there will be unpaid state income taxes totaling over $200 billion dollars.

We have the full backing of state governors, select members of congress and those financial leaders who choose to profit from honest business instead of insider trading and financial scams. This means “change.”

What we demand?

We want monies owed and ordered to be paid as law requires to be paid.  All we are demanding is restoration of rule of law in accordance with existing court orders and legal judgements, nothing more.

We also have law enforcement and intelligence officials who tell us that they will never sleep another night until they have hunted all these people involved down and have seen justice done. 

They say they are willing to spend their lives hunting assets, even to the ends of the earth, beginning with vacation homes, yachts, family trusts, safe deposit boxes, anywhere on the planet and that existing laws covering money laundering and terrorism give them the needed tools.

 

How Many Were Involved in Cooking the Books?

The term I keep hearing is “continuing criminal enterprise.”  I am more a builder than one to seek retribution but others are not so forgiving.  We believe this is why funds are being held up, out of fear.

As there is enough money here for Ameritrust to be the most powerful congressional lobby, being a “corporate person,” the richest ever imagined, think of the irony. 

The laws meant to deprive Americans of their rights being used to restore democracy and rule of law.  The idea is frightening.

As billions are assigned for veterans relief at a time of extreme national emergency, failure to do so is unthinkable.

America was never intended to be what it has become.  We have the funds, the plans and the people to begin a rapid and well conceived turn-around of America.

This is a plan of investment in America, of hard work, of the most extreme form of financial conservatism thinkable.

This is about work and paying taxes and building in America for America by Americans.

Ask yourself who has been blocking this, who is above the law?  Court documents on all of this, as required by law, are in the public domain.

Welcome to any who think this is less than we say.

Editing: Jim W. Dean

Dear Folks, You may get tired of hearing this but I am going to say it once again. We have to take ownership of this problem. If we let them get away with this and keep their ill gotten gains there is absolutely nothing they will fear doing to us in the future. Only a conquered, defeated people would accept such a humiliation.

Fortunately, as the WOT has expanded the Special Operations Forces to 50,000, many are becoming aware of this situation and needless to say are more than a little unhappy about it. Add in legions of ole time civilian and military Intel people and we have a multi-generational trained and well motivated group of leaders ready.

CORRUPTION

Obama Signs Global Internet Treaty Worse Than SOPA

January 28th, 2012 by

 

http://www.infowars.com/obama-signs-global-internet-treaty-worse-than-sopa/

 

White House bypasses Senate to ink agreement that could allow Chinese companies to demand ISPs remove web content in US with no legal oversight

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, January 26, 2012

Months before the debate about Internet censorship raged as SOPA and PIPA dominated the concerns of web users, President Obama signed an international treaty that would allow companies in China or any other country in the world to demand ISPs remove web content in the US with no legal oversight whatsoever.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement was signed by Obama on October 1 2011, yet is currently the subject of a White House petition demanding Senators be forced to ratify the treaty. The White House has circumvented the necessity to have the treaty confirmed by lawmakers by presenting it an as “executive agreement,” although legal scholars have highlighted the dubious nature of this characterization.

The hacktivist group Anonymous attacked and took offline the Federal Trade Commission’s website yesterday in protest against the treaty, which was also the subject of demonstrations across major cities in Poland, a country set to sign the agreement today.

Under the provisions of ACTA, copyright holders will be granted sweeping direct powers to demand ISPs remove material from the Internet on a whim. Whereas ISPs normally are only forced to remove content after a court order, all legal oversight will be abolished, a precedent that will apply globally, rendering the treaty worse in its potential scope for abuse than SOPA or PIPA.

A country known for its enforcement of harsh Internet censorship policies like China could demand under the treaty that an ISP in the United States remove content or terminate a website on its server altogether. As we have seen from the enforcement of similar copyright policies in the US, websites are sometimes targeted for no justifiable reason.

The groups pushing the treaty also want to empower copyright holders with the ability to demand that users who violate intellectual property rights (with no legal process) have their Internet connections terminated, a punishment that could only ever be properly enforced by the creation of an individual Internet ID card for every web user, a system that is already in the works.

“The same industry rightsholder groups that support the creation of ACTA have also called for mandatory network-level filtering by Internet Service Providers and for Internet Service Providers to terminate citizens’ Internet connection on repeat allegation of copyright infringement (the “Three Strikes” /Graduated Response) so there is reason to believe that ACTA will seek to increase intermediary liability and require these things of Internet Service Providers,” reports the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Totalitarianism

The treaty will also mandate that ISPs disclose personal user information to the copyright holder, while providing authorities across the globe with broader powers to search laptops and Internet-capable devices at border checkpoints.

In presenting ACTA as an “international agreement” rather than a treaty, the Obama administration managed to circumvent the legislative process and avoid having to get Senate approval, a method questioned by Senator Wyden.

“That said, even if Obama has declared ACTA an executive agreement (while those in Europe insist that it’s a binding treaty), there is a very real Constitutional question here: can it actually be an executive agreement?” asks TechDirt. “The law is clear that the only things that can be covered by executive agreements are things that involve items that are solely under the President’s mandate. That is, you can’t sign an executive agreement that impacts the things Congress has control over. But here’s the thing: intellectual property, in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, is an issue given to Congress, not the President. Thus, there’s a pretty strong argument that the president legally cannot sign any intellectual property agreements as an executive agreement and, instead, must submit them to the Senate.”.

26 European Union member states along with the EU itself are set to sign the treaty at a ceremony today in Tokyo. Other countries wishing to sign the agreement have until May 2013 to do so.

Critics are urging those concerned about Obama’s decision to sign the document with no legislative oversight to demand the Senate be forced to ratify the treaty.

Totalitarianism

Militarized Drills Continue Stadiums Prepped to Be Used as Martial Law Staging Centers

January 28th, 2012 by

 

http://theintelhub.com/2012/01/27/militarized-drills-continue-stadiums-prepped-to-be-used-as-martial-law-staging-centers/

 

The Intel Hub
Shepard Ambellas & Avalon
January 27, 2012

Los Angeles — By now you may have heard of the many FEMA camps located throughout the United States which will serve as holding centers for U.S. citizens during times of civil unrest.

The camps are no conspiracy theory and they happen to be popping up at a rapid rate in the Continental United States (CONUS). In fact, Infowars recently reported on a new detention hub located at the Los Angeles Airport (LAX).

But what about the fact that every stadium is a FEMA camp hiding in plain sight, stagnantly awaiting its grim use one day in the near future? (Think New Orleans Super Dome)

The roots of this diabolic agenda trace back to the Reagan/Oliver North era and theREX84 Program.

However, modern-day Congress is still approving these camps under the guise of terror provisions set forth by the staged attacks of 9/11 and USA PATRIOT Act which was signed into law by Bush in 2001 but created years before to be implemented after the Oklahoma City Bombing, which, to this day, has been covered up by corrupt FBI and Southern Poverty Law Center operatives.

Yesterday, an urban warfare drill conducted over downtown Los Angeles had area residents shaken up as 4 black OH-6 “Little Birds” and one “Blackhawk” helicopter with military personal aboard, invaded the city of angels, with more drills set for today.

Sadly these military maneuvers by special operations forces of the U.S. military are now nearly commonplace in the CONUS.

Helicopters hovered for awhile over the US Bank building, made a drop at a park, and flew over the Lakers Stadium while a game was in progress.

The operational forces used the Dodgers Stadium as a staging point (mock FEMA Camp) to base the training session out of.

Stadiums have and will be used as FEMA camps during martial law type situations during future civil unrest and or economic collapse.

Hurricane Katrina was a prime example of how law enforcement and military work together during times of martial law to set up FEMA camps in sports stadiums as well as take part in large scale, illegal gun confiscation.

One curious aspect of the ‘Exercise’ is the involvement of the AON Tower. As recently mentioned in the New York Times in the January 11th Edition, AON is leaving the United States.

Aon’s main corporate offices are located in Austrailia which begs the question, “Could Larry Silverstein have been involved with Aon in the WTC purchase and subsequent Destruction and Insurance Payoff of $7,000,000,000.00?“.

 

An April 2004 CNN article reads;

Larry Silverstein signed the lease just six weeks before the WTC’s twin towers were brought to the ground by terrorists in the September 11, 2001, attacks.

Silverstein contended that the two jetliners crashing into the twin towers about 15 minutes apart should be considered two separate events, which would allow him to collect the maximum from the insurers for each tower, as much as $7 billion.

After all, this line of possible affiliation is logical given that Aon is an Insurance Company who would have benefited from such a covert secret government operation.

In fact, Chicago is Aon’s corporate headquarters in the United States and was designated the WTC of Chicago. Is there a possibility that a False-Flag Operation and subsequent rescue operation  is being practiced ‘right-in-plain-sight’?

Is there the possibility that a Nuclear Event might be planned for Chicago – Obamas Hometown and now the preplanning stages for Martial Law Implementations by Rham Emanuel and the G8 Summit?

Is this conspiracy theory or are we witnessing the planning stages of a Flase-Flag Event that could bring about Martial Law – the result of Domestic Terrorism?

Totalitarianism


SEO Powered By SEOPressor