Log in



Categories » ‘Constitution’

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

The State of Surveillance Technology

January 27th, 2012 by

 

 

 

 

 

By Doug Hornig, Senior Editor

Lovers of liberty have seemingly had a good bit to celebrate over the past two weeks.

First, there was an unprecedented outpouring of negative public sentiment about the Congressional bills SOPA (House) and PIPA (Senate); they are legislation that would have thrown a large governmental monkey wrench into the relatively smooth-running cogs of the Internet. Millions of Americans signed online petitions against the bills (I did) after seeing websites' various protests. Google shrouded its search page in black; Wikipedia, and Reddit went dark entirely (although Wikipedia could be accessed if one read the information available via clicking the sole link on its protest page); Facebook and Twitter urged users to contact their representatives; and many other core Internet businesses also raised their voices in opposition.

Such was the outpouring of dissent that even Washington, D.C. had to listen. The bills, which a week earlier had seem assured of swift passage, suddenly turned to poison. Supporters, forced to concede that the public really was pissed off this time, fled. Leadership in both houses tabled the legislation, pending further review and revision.

But before we get too self-congratulatory, however, it's wise to note that this victory dish is probably best enjoyed with a serving of caution. As Casey Extraordinary Technology editor Alex Daley summed up the situation for us here at Casey Research: "Be sure this will come back again, likely post-election, and snuck through as part of a bigger package. It arrests power from the judiciary, and the legislature likes nothing more than to thumb its nose at those ridiculous judges and all their due process this and Constitution that. It will eventually pass, just not like this." We can't now go to sleep on this one.

Second, on Monday the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that police may not attach a GPS tracking device to a suspect's car without a search warrant. This is a landmark decision, to be sure, but one that was carefully circumscribed by the justices. The placing of the device constituted a physical intrusion on the suspect, they wrote, and thus was impermissible. Left unruled upon was the larger question of tracking someone's movements when there was no physical violation, as would be the case when, say, police access signals from a GPS-enabled smartphone. Though it wasn't directly addressed, the concurring opinions strongly suggest that the justices might be more sharply divided on that issue.

A lapse of vigilance in these matters would be a mistake.

Since both of them are tech-related, and also since it's January, this is probably a good time to review how individual freedom fared over the past year vis à vis the technology of surveillance in general.

But before I do, I need to make a couple of things clear.

Where We Stand

At Casey Extraordinary Technology, we are not technophobes. We don't think that it would be a good thing to retreat to the woods and live out our days spearing game and cooking it over fires. Quite the contrary. We're technophiles who appreciate what tech has done to improve human living conditions, and we believe that it holds the key to the solution of many, if not all, of our present problems. We like to err on the side of hope.

In addition, we understand that society has a powerful interest in maintaining a certain level of order. It's intolerable that personal disputes should be settled by gun battles in the streets or that serious infringements on the rights of others – whether it be physical crimes such as robbery, rape, or murder, or non-physical ones like fraud – should be ignored. The most ardent libertarian would generally agree that a government ought to have the authority to prevent or punish the aggression of one individual upon another and to enforce contracts freely entered into. Thus tradeoffs with our basic right to do as we see fit must be made if man's worst impulses are to be deterred.

That said, the tricky part is deciding where to draw the line between reasonable and overzealous laws and enforcements. Surveillance technology is at the center of this debate. It's good and getting ever better. Even the most law-abiding of citizens have been subjected to steadily increasing levels of governmental – as well as private sector – watchfulness over their daily lives. That has occurred with no indication that the public is yet prepared to say, "Enough. This is where we draw that line in the sand."

The past year was no exception. I won't go into developments I've already written about, such as the growth of the TSA's VIPR operations, last summer's lemonade-stand busts, the ghastly E-Verify proposal , and the Fed's Social Listening Program. But the sad truth is that there are plenty more from which to choose. Space considerations permit a close examination of only a few, but a liberty-oriented legal foundation provides a quick overview of the year.

It's a Bird, It's a Plane, It's…

… a drone.

Remote-controlled drone aircraft, like the famed Predator, have become a staple of the nightly news. We see them launching missiles against terrorists, conducting spy missions over Pakistan, patrolling the borders looking for drug smugglers and alien infiltrators. Now we're going to have to get used to seeing them in the skies over, well, all of us.

Yes, those same Predator drones are being used increasingly by local law enforcement in the US.

That was unknown to most Americans before late last year, when the great North Dakota cattle-rustling incident hit the press. It seems that back in June, six neighbors' cows had the misfortune to wander onto a 3,000-acre farm in eastern North Dakota owned by the Brossart family, whose members allegedly belong to the Sovereign Citizen Movement, an anti-government group that the FBI considers extremist and violent.

When the sheriff attempted to reclaim the cows, the family refused to give them up, ordering him off its property at gunpoint. A 16-hour standoff ensued, with the sheriff requesting the usual reinforcements: state highway patrol, a regional SWAT team, a bomb squad, and deputy sheriffs from three other counties. But he also called nearby Grand Forks Air Force Base and asked for help from a $154 million MQ-9 Predator B drone, normally used to secure the Canadian border for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Long story short, the drone silently surveilled the farm from two miles up, relaying information from its sophisticated sensors as to what the Brossarts were doing. When the surveillance showed that the family members had put their weapons down (yes, it can see that well at that distance), the authorities moved in, neutralizing the Brossarts and making the first known, drone-assisted arrests of US citizens.

Law enforcement was pleased, perhaps rightly so. No blood was spilled. Another Ruby Ridge was avoided. The cows – street value $6,000, but now rather a bit more costly – were recovered.

But that was just the beginning. Local North Dakota police say they have used the Grand Forks Predators to fly at least two dozen surveillance flights since June. The FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration have also used Predators for domestic investigations, officials admit. And Michael Kostelnik, a retired Air Force general who heads the office that supervises the drones, says that Predators are flown "in many areas around the country, not only for federal operators, but also for state and local law enforcement and emergency responders in times of crisis." [emphasis mine]

Who knew?

Apparently not Congress, for one. Spokespersons for Customs, which owns the drones, claim there is legal authorization for this usage because it was clearly indicated in the purchase request for the Predators that one purpose was "interior law enforcement support." But those four words sailed right by Congresswoman Jane Harman – Chair of the Homeland Security Subcommittee at the time the drone purchases were approved – who insists that "no one ever discussed using Predators to help local police." So this expanded civilian use of military surveillance hardware came about with no new law, no public discussion, not even a written regulation… just a few words buried in a budget request that no one in charge of approving it noticed.

There will be mission creep here, as there always is. Expect drones to gather data on any large political demonstration, for example – only, to be fully accurate, you won't be noticing them above you. They fly too high and are too silent for that.

Internet Surveillance

In addition to SOPA/PIPA, there is PCIP. SOPA/PIPA were about shutting down Internet sites that the federal government deems offensive. PCIP is about gathering information.

As is so often the case with "well-meaning" legislation, the Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011 (H.R. 1981, or PCIP) is allegedly aimed at something about which all agree. Nobody argues against shielding kids from pornographers.

Not that the problem addressed isn't real. The Internet has proven to be a fertile stalking ground for sexual predators. As a society, we have already agreed to a certain level of cyber-entrapment, allowing police to run online sting operations against those who are actively targeting kids. If that catches some innocent people in the net, so be it. The public majority is willing to accept such collateral damage so long as the real bad guys are found and put away.

And yes, H.R. 1981 also contains some non-controversial provisions. Stricter punishment for interstate commerce transactions that promote child porn? Sure. Bolstering laws to protect child witnesses? No problem.

But, as always, the details are alive with devils. PCIP is also about pre-crimes – i.e., it entails gathering evidence before any crime is committed… perhaps even before said crime is contemplated. The goal is that, in the event of an arrest, supporting online records can quickly and easily be subpoenaed.

In order to accomplish that, everyone must be considered a potential criminal. Everyone.

What PCIP will mandate is that Internet providers keep detailed records about each one of us, including: name, address, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, all Internet activity for the previous 12 months (something sure to be extended after the first successful busts), and any IP addresses assigned to you – without a search warrant, court order, or even the slightest suspicion of criminal activity.

In other words, the government is proposing to expand the ranks of de facto private-sector cops, the same way that banks are now forced to report any "suspicious financial activity." The legislation would enlist – nay, require – ISPs to compile detailed dossiers on every citizen, and to have them readily accessible for whatever "crime-fighting" or other purposes authorities want them. This thereby saves federal government officials the trouble and expense of doing it themselves. It's breathtaking. You almost have to admire the elegance of their solution to the universal 'Net surveillance problem that's vexed them for some time.

No wonder the Electronic Frontier Foundation has scornfully tabbed this the "Data Retention Bill," warning that the stored data "could become available to civil litigants in private lawsuits – whether it's the RIAA trying to identify downloaders, a company trying to uncover and retaliate against an anonymous critic, or a divorce lawyer looking for dirty laundry." And in a grotesque illustration of the law of unintended consequences, the EFF adds: "These databases would also be a new and valuable target for black hat hackers, be they criminals trying to steal identities or foreign governments trying to unmask anonymous dissidents."

H.R. 1981 sailed through the House Judiciary Committee in late July of last year but is yet to be voted on (although it was slated for "expedited consideration" in mid-December). Will it provoke the kind of public outcry directed against SOPA? Don't count on it. What politician in his or her right mind would dare oppose legislation that "protects kids from pornographers?"

Reverse Surveillance

Meaning: when we turn the cameras on the government.

In a sense, we are all now street journalists. Most famously, the name "Rodney King" would mean nothing to anyone today but for a bystander with a cell phone camera. As these devices have become all but ubiquitous, we ordinary citizens now have an unprecedented ability to record crimes in progress, regardless of what side of the law the perpetrators are on.

Or do we?

While police understandably have welcomed citizen recordings that help them with their cases, they are again understandably not so sanguine when they themselves are the potential lawbreakers. And they're hitting back. People filming unfolding events are routinely ordered away from the scene by the police, even if they happen to be standing on their own private property – and threatened with arrest if they don't put the camera away.

Considering the First Amendment to the Constitution, that's been a bluff… at least until recently.

Now authorities are asserting their right to charge video- or audiographers of police events with crimes ranging from obstruction of justice to eavesdropping to illegal wiretapping.

So far, to their credit, the courts have been mostly unsympathetic. In August, a jury acquitted a Chicago woman who used her cell phone to secretly record a conversation with police investigators about a sexual harassment complaint she was filing against the department. Also in August, the US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled in favor of the defendant in a case involving a complaint filed by a Boston man who filmed the scene of an October 2007 arrest on his cell phone, only to be arrested himself and charged with a violation of Massachusetts wiretapping laws.

In Illinois in September, a judge threw out five eavesdropping indictments – which carried maximum penalties of 15 years in prison on each count – against a man who had recorded conversations with local police officers who he claimed were harassing him on his own property. In a stinging rebuke to the prosecution, the judge wrote, "A statute intended to prevent unwarranted intrusions into a citizen's privacy cannot be used as a shield for public officials who cannot assert a comparable right of privacy in their public duties. Such action impedes the free flow of information concerning public officials and violates the First Amendment right to gather such information."

So far, so good. Still, these kinds of busts are on the rise nationwide. Even if they're all laughed out of court, the mere threat of arrest (and the potential concomitant bodily harm) is often enough to make most people think twice about the wisdom of challenging a police order.

And, truthfully, would you trust the current Supreme Court – a majority of which has consistently supported government rights over that of citizens – to rule correctly on this?

Target: Casey Research!

One of the most ominous developments for us personally crawled out from under its rock in November. Again without any public debate, DHS unleashed its National Operations Center's Media Monitoring Initiative. Yep, it's exactly what it sounds like: The NOC's Office of Operations Coordination and Planning is going to collect information from news anchors, journalists, reporters, or anyone who may use "traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed."

Thus Washington, D.C. unilaterally grants itself the right to monitor what you say. Doesn't matter if you're the New York Times, Brian Williams, a basement blogger, an online whistleblower, or known government critics like ourselves. They're gonna take note of your utterances and file them away for future use.

Journalists are not the only targets, by the way. Also included among those subject to this surveillance are government officials (domestic or not) who make public statements; private-sector employees who do the same; and "persons known to have been involved in major crimes of Homeland Security interest," however large that umbrella might be.

At Casey Research, we're not about to engage in self-censorship just because some bureaucrat somewhere has nothing better to do than watch what we're saying. They're welcome to it, and we'll save them the trouble of archiving it; most of it's preserved on our website, anyway.

The larger speculation is: what's the endgame here?

Data Storage Capacity

Back in 1997, I wrote an article entitled Here's Looking at You, which examined the ways in which big government was encroaching upon our private lives. The piece was published in February 1998 in a very popular national men's magazine. (In my defense, I hasten to add that these glossy periodicals were among the very few public outlets, before Casey Research was born, for journalists who wrote about such "fringe" topics.)

As I was writing this piece you are now reading, I couldn't help but take a look back fourteen years. It seems almost like a prehistoric era… before 9/11, the PATRIOT Act, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, drones, "free-speech zones" at political conventions, wall-penetrating radar, iPhones, and wholesale government monitoring of email and phone conversations, among a zillion other things. Heck, even the Internet was still more or less a novelty: I found that I had cautioned readers to be mindful of an insidious newfangled thing called "cookies."

The tech of today is light-years more advanced. But even back then, I was concerned. And I predicted where I saw the trend heading. Naturally enough, not all of my predictions came to pass – I was certain for instance that by now we'd have a national ID card – but unfortunately, most of them did.

The reason I bring this up here is not to tout myself as particularly prescient. It's to note something of actual importance. In 1998, I could still maintain that our saving grace was that data-storage capabilities were way insufficient for the total surveillance of hundreds of millions of Americans and probably would be for a long time to come.

How wrong I was.

It is already technologically feasible for governments to record nearly everything that is said or done within their borders – every phone conversation, electronic message, social media interaction, the movements of nearly every person and vehicle, and video from every street corner.

Before long, it'll also be financially feasible to archive it, according to a sobering report published last December by the Brookings Center for Technology Innovation.

The report concludes that: "Plummeting digital storage costs will soon make it possible for authoritarian regimes to not only monitor known dissidents, but to also store the complete set of digital data associated with everyone within their borders. These enormous databases of captured information will create what amounts to a surveillance time machine, enabling state security services to retroactively eavesdrop on people in the months and years before they were designated as surveillance targets. This will fundamentally change the dynamics of dissent, insurgency and revolution."

Emphasis mine. Consider the implications.

The key, according to the Brookings report: "Over the past three decades, [data] storage costs have declined by a factor of 10 approximately every 4 years, reducing the per-gigabyte cost from approximately $85,000 (in 2011 dollars) in mid-1984 to about five cents today.” Using GPS, mobile phone and WiFi inputs, “identifying the location of each of one million people to [a 15-foot] accuracy at 5-minute intervals, 24 hours a day for a full year could easily be stored in 1,000 gigabytes, which would cost slightly over $50 at today's prices." Fourteen cents a day to archive the collective movements of any selected million of us.

Phone calls? "The audio for all of the telephone calls made by a single person over the course of one year could be stored using roughly 3.3 gigabytes. On a per capita basis, the cost to store all phone calls will fall from about 17 cents per person per year today to under 2 cents in 2015."

Video storage takes far more space, of course, and there are also major logistical problems involved in managing such a huge amount of data. But the point is made. Technological innovation will provide the tools. And as soon as government can do something, they invariably will do it.

Investing

These few examples, winnowed from hundreds of others I could cite, testify to a mushrooming new industry in the US, what some have called the cyber-industrial complex.

It's big business. How big we don't know, because much of it is shrouded in either government or corporate secrecy. The Washington Post's Dana Priest, twice a Pulitzer winner and one of the few true investigative journalists in America still working inside the mainstream media, published some groundbreaking work on the subject in the summer of 2010. If you haven't read it already, you should. The website is dynamic, with regular updates posted on the subject and reader input invited.

Several other recent probes also have opened the shadowy surveillance world to a little more light. You can check out some of the latest techniques and which companies are implementing them at The Surveillance Catalog published by the Wall Street Journal and The State of Surveillance: The Data,published by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

Perhaps in your browsing you'll find some publicly traded companies that will attract your investment interest. For our part, at Casey Extraordinary Technology we prefer to seek out companies that are engaged in changing our world for the better rather than the worse. Those are the ones you'll find in our portfolio.

In the end, we must acknowledge that technological advancement, especially at the rate we're experiencing it in the present era, is bound to spawn evil applications along with the good. But we're optimists here. We believe humanity is in a long-term uptrend, with technology setting torches on the path to a better life.

But that all depends on keeping people free. That's why we will continue to expose – and oppose – government efforts to stifle innovation, creativity, and personal liberty. I'm not holding my breath but perhaps eventually Washington, D.C. will get the point, and follow our lead.   Visit Casey Research

 

CORRUPT GOVERNMENT

 

 

THE BUSH CABAL NUKING THE OUTHOUSE!

January 27th, 2012 by

 

http://tdarkcabal.blogspot.com/2012/01/january-18-2012-white-hats-report-34.html
 

The White Hats and Ed Falcone have been in London all this week meeting daily with key parties interfacing with the House of Lords and UK Agencies. Multiple agendas are in play at the highest levels.  The White Hats are using the U.K. arena to commence their work due to the total control that the Dark Cabal … Bushes, Clintons, Obamas and all of their Minions … has had in the United States, including the American Main Stream Media. It is difficult to believe the Bushes have gone undetected for 50 years with a hidden agenda that is so deep they have compromised every American virtue. 

Look at some of the items we are working with: 
•  Nominee accounts used by parties fronting for the CIA and Bush Sr. /Josef Ackermann/ Michael Herzog and Paul Guenette, are being discussed and tracked. Using the integrity of the London Capital Markets to fund unauthorized Agency and Military activities, as well as to self-enrich key Political and Government employees, is also under review and being evidenced to appropriate authorities.  This week and next, as exposure mounts, more will be presented and played out.

•  A vast multi-Trillion dollar fraud involving a Central Intelligence Agency owned Foundation known to us all is also under formal investigation by the British authorities with the Attorney General being kept appraised. This Foundation is bypassing Congress, but benefiting the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Homeland Security and private parties. A well-known Asian Fraudster, Wilfredo Saurin, has been allowed to gain a complicit, FRB NY supported role, protecting him from arrest as an Agent of these entities. Working in conjunction with FRB NY, Saurin and corrupt Bankers have been instrumental in assisting cross wired bogus asset backed SWIFTS, which have been used to generate MTN’s and to participate in substantial inter-bank trading.  A complex arena of fraud is now being unraveled. The records are lodged with investigating authorities. The White Hats have copies of the governing documents and the chain of SWIFT sequences and the accounts used.

•  As part of this very deep investigation, Edward Falcone’s case has also been raised as a further example of the criminal complicity of banks, and the extent to which the Shadow Government operates with impunity.  To start, the Banks involved and the Bank auditing firms will be officially put on notice to respond to their obvious negligence in enforcing international banking regulations and money laundering laws.

The money stolen from and owed to Ed Falcone would have been used to fund United States projects including Florida, the Gulf Coast region and Katrina victims, as well as city regeneration, jobs, taxes, recovery, and dignity for Americans.  Instead, Falcone’s money ended up with the Bush Cabal, U.S. Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney, Vice President Joe Biden, Michael Herzog, Paul Guenette, Texas Lt. Governor David Dewhurst, his brother Don Nevin, and the CIA agents used to launder it across multiple banks for Bush Sr. and Biden.

The Cabal has publicly refused to acknowledge the unknown and unregulated extent of their wealth generation, the extent of their cross entanglement with the world drug cartels, their funding of clandestine operations like rendition torture centers, and self severing rogue agendas are just a few of the operations of this group.

•  When will Herzog, Guenette, Dewhurst, and Nevin be arrested to start the process of Law? One morning they will all wake up to find a worldwide media firestorm has been unleashed and they are all named and shamed.  It is an abhorrent betrayal of an American citizen and humanitarian projects lost to thieves. The White Hats and UK agencies have been allowed unfettered access to review the enormous depth of support documentation behind the Falcone case.  London, Frankfurt, Germany and other EU based Traders are all cross linked and identified. Banks, trades, monthly profits and returns are all on record.  There are criminal cases for Wire Fraud, domestic and international bank fraud, Securities Fraud and RICO for institutions and individuals.   Volume after volume has been documented and evidenced.  Herzog has threatened to take down Bush when he is exposed and there is enough evidence to directly incriminate both Herzog, Guenette, Dewhurst and Nevin many times over. Commerzbank in Frankfurt, Germany and Fed records are all held including the Isle of Man Banks used to hide profits and all other illicit activities. Equally exposed on record are the named Nominees they tried to hide their profits behind, including amounts the Traders used, along with all account information. One day, Mr. Herzog, Mr. Guenette, Mr. Dewhurst, and Mr. Nevins… That knock on the door is coming for you.  Never thought you’d be reading this, did you?  Your arrogance will be your undoing.

•  Bank accounts on record with Bush Sr. and son, Jeb Bush, are counter linked as signatories.  This will have a huge impact on poor Jeb’s political aspirations even though he may not have been involved in the original heist.  Those co-signed accounts exist and are also part of the Falcone evidence files.

•  Obama has been busy accepting funds from numerous sources and are held in his very own offshore bank accounts. This information is held by Falcone’s attorneys and the White Hats, and will be further exposed as he attempts re-election.  Obama, do you not think we are going to let the American public know about your dirty, corrupted self?

•  Why have Bill Bonney and the Argo Trust still not been settled?  Just these two elements of the Global Settlements represent Trillions of dollars for American Projects, jobs and the elimination of the US national debt of 15 Trillion dollars. 

Again, Herzog threatened he would expose Bush Sr. if he’s made to pay back what they have stolen.  ARREST HERZOG AND GUINETTE, AND CLEAN UP AMERICA!  Arrest Dewhurst and Nevin, and impeach Biden.  Let the White Hats expose the criminal activities of Mitt Romney!  How can Mitt run for President when he is responsible for hundreds of offshore bank accounts that have skirted U.S tax laws?

Americans have no idea that the Shadow Government and the Military Industrial Complex take not only 55% of all known accrued U.S. Tax income, but also works in conjunction with the co-owned Cabal Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which maintains a vast unauthorized Ponzi Pyramid Cash Machine hidden from Congress. 

These groups engage in so many clandestine activities often beyond the rule of law or ethics, while our inner cities decay and collapse as crime and drugs thrive.  This money feeds the Cabal, not our own people.  Multi-Trillions are squandered annually paying for this Second-Tier Government, unelected and unchecked, answering only to Agency Shadow bosses like Bush Sr. and Senator Jay Rockefeller, etc.

Again, Wilfredo Saurin, a well-known Filipino crook, acting for, protected by, and in complicit conspiracy with an Agency controlled Foundation, FRB NY, and JP Morgan Chase, has implemented the release of bogus and fraudulent SWIFTS, which have been used in a trading sequence, with no Congressional knowledge or authorization, to cause the issuance of $15 Trillion dollars’ worth of MTN’s.  The MTN’s are not only re-credit lined, but capital used to reverse MTN and Euro overnight spot trades via London and other EU banks.  All these players work hand in glove with these crooks.  This fraud inquiry is now under way.

The White Hats have access to the morally good and highly connected associates both in place and in play, right now each day, willing to help recover a good part of that money for the benefit of America and the world.  We need accessible courageous US Congressmen.  As we reported previously, there is a solution to regenerate The American Economy, American Jobs, and American Wealth.  RELEASE THE MONEY TO REFUND THE GLOBAL SETTLEMENTS and SAVE THE WORLD!

However, we have Romney being prepared for office – A dubious man who stole Ed Falcone’s funds and pocketed a Billion for himself.  We also have an illegal President with no Birth Certificate, with his hands in the pockets of Wall Street, with some very dangerous socialists and communists advisors, and America’s own fanatical version of Dr. Strangelove — conspiring and planning to get Jeb Bush elected as the next Vice President, or even President, once the pending writs are served on Romney.  It looks like Romney may also face real IRS investigation soon on his false Tax Returns.  We must ask the IRS — What about Romney’s offshore accounts with money he earned from the theft of the Falcone funds?  Is your boss Geithner NOT letting you investigate the corruption?

The Agency Foundation and Obama tried desperately to get the 15 Trillion back from London but the banks won’t release it.  Britain and America need to work together on this. WAKE UP CONGRESS!  Those funds can be recovered in a deal with the United Kingdom!  If you do not have the ability to step to the plate, The White Hats Do! Let us get the deal done.

Both the United Kingdom and America have been so badly screwed.  America has simply become far too crooked for Justice to be accomplished here.  America’s future and fate may well be playing out as these treasonous parties are exposed by Old Empires, whose own authorities are now availing themselves of the sordid facts.  All records are being presented live and directed to Agency heads who are currently evaluating the hard-to-swallow evidence now placed before them.  When you can’t get Justice at home, sometimes you have to get it another way.  Again, at this very moment, all the facts, supporting evidence and brutal yet sordid truth, is being exposed naming and shaming those responsible for the deplorable and duplicitous conduct of our Leaders and Global Banker cohorts, including Ackermann of Deutsch and the full Commerzbank Traders and other connections.

It took many years to bring down Capone, and the Teflon Don. Focused dedication got them in the end.  The spirit of Elliot Ness lives on. Because you don’t see it, doesn’t mean it’s not happening.  All the evidence and facts are right now under appraisal by Foreign Enforcement Agencies who, in consultation with others, will select the route and time to unleash justice and retribution.  We will not compromise sensitive incriminating evidence needed in court by pre-publishing.  Just know we have it, it’s all there and it’s all playing out. 

We will be in touch.  Remember to keep a close eye and ear on the inner sanctums of Great Britain as the exposure is delivered to that great Sovereign body.

 

CORRUPTION

 

 

SOPA and PIPA Fully Alive And a New Bill Joins Them

January 26th, 2012 by

 

 

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/sopa-and-pipa-fully-alive-and-new-bill.html

 

Heather Callaghan
Activist Post

Many of us breathed a sigh of relief when an overwhelming amount of Americans banned together and voiced their opposition to Congress over both the Stop Online Piracy Act, and Protect Intellectual Property Act.

Sites that dimmed the screen for a day or two have gone back to normal — Facebook users have swapped their anti-SOPA images for their previous profile pictures.

We may have even believed that the postponement of the vote originally scheduled for January 24th was some sort of white flag of capitulation. But that is certainly not the MO of most lawmakers.

While the outcry did get the attention of Congress, they are simply returning unflinchingly back to the drawing board to wait out our attention spans. Articles whirled that SOPA was dead and the bill was pulled when the bill's sponsor Lamar Smith said in a statement that there would be no further action “until there is wider agreement on a solution.”

Lamar isn't really listening. “It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products.” 

Actually, SOPA is set to be reformulated in February. PIPA will be revisited with possible amendments in the coming weeks. Case in point, all is still open and possible — nothing is dead, pulled, or cancelled. If that wasn't enough to keep us on our toes, a new, similar bill has surfaced.

Déjà Vu in the form of OPEN — The New Anti-Piracy Bill

As an alternative to SOPA-PIPA, Representative Darrell Issa (CA-R), and 24 co-sponsors introduced the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) H.R. 3782 on Wednesday, during the Internet blackout.

From PCWorld:

OPEN would give oversight to the International Trade Commission (ITC) instead of the Justice Department, focuses on foreign-based websites, includes an appeals process, and would apply only to websites that "willfully" promote copyright violation.

The bill pretends to only target foreign websites, while keeping Americans free to surf and post, but the bill's wording is wide open to pursue American sites. Just one example: when describing an infringing site, it starts with those "that are accessed through a non-domestic domain name," but continues in section (8)(A)(ii) for any site that "conducts business directed to residents of the United States."

 

It sounds like, "in general," copyright holders will be the ones filing complaints to the Commission, but the writing leaves it open for any complainant to file. The ITC would still have the ability to coerce payment processors and ad networks to cease funding and linking the accused in question. Who could determine "willful" infringement?

Also, none of these bills had been decided before the U.S. Government took down New Zealand owned Megaupload.com during the commotion. To which, Anonymous responded by shutting down the websites of the U.S. Department of Justice, Universal Music, Recording Industry Association of America, the U.S. Copyright Office, Broadcast Music Inc. and the Motion Picture Association of America.

"The [DOJ’s] action 'demonstrates why we don’t need SOPA in the first place,' points out PC-World’s Tony Bradley." The government was enforcing a previous anti-piracy law called PRO-IP signed by Bush in 2008.

OPEN is gaining support from groups like Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Consumer Electronics Association and more.

While it seems admirable that the bill is transparent and open for public comment, most laws of this nature are broad and allow for bigger, no-common sense crackdowns later. Plus, there might only be a couple concessions and the pacifying effects of "being heard."

One commenter of the bill aptly noted:

'Reasonable belief' and 'credible evidence' are too vague and have the appearance of inviting highly subjective interpretation with the option for the commission and/or the provider to exercise sweeping powers with impunity.

Whenever any group is appeased after a battle, it cannot be emphasized enough — the lawmakers' modus operandi will be: aim high, brace for the outcry, make a couple alterations and sneak the bill back in when no one's looking. Keep it going and going. Call it by a different name. Haggle. It appears there is compromise and reasoning now, but once the bill passes into law, reason goes out the window, and we are the only ones compromised.

Theft is a reality — although not one that has seriously damaged the growing entertainment industry, or caused massive death and devastation. If Hollywood, pitching the biggest fit, were actually going down, why should we go down with it?

It is more unfortunate that Americans must be so tirelessly vigilant to protect their online activities from the same lawmakers who are tanking the country in so many other truly devastating ways.

The dismantling of Internet freedom will not stop here. Let's borrow an MO and not let up.

To SOPA — Say NOPA!

To PIPA — Pipe down!

To OPEN — Shut it!

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Let us not forget that this is a legal issue between the copy-write holder, and the copy-write violator, and the violator is innocent until a court finds them guilty. Hardly a reason to violate a couple hundred million people’s privacy. Who are these assholes trying to fool? Does congress think the whole damn internet community is as stupid as they are?

Additional Sources:

http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/sopa-and-pipa-postponed-but-not-cancelled/ 
http://mashable.com/2012/01/20/pipa-postponed/
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/nternet-spoke-and-finally-congress-listened
http://www.webpronews.com/lamar-smith-to-delay-sopa-until-wider-agreement-on-solution-2012-01

RELATED ACTIVIST POST ARTICLES:

No More Back Room Deals – Users Must Have a Voice In Governing the Internet
PIPA vote stalled while US censorship still grows

 

CONGRESS

 

 

HOW THE SUBJUGATION OF STATE NATIONAL STATUS CAME ABOUT

January 24th, 2012 by

 

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Due to the present Republican debates, and the actions of that scallywag in the oval office, many of my readers have a regenerated interest in politics’, as shown by the much more astute questions and comments I receive. Due to my age and memory problems, I have been sorely tasked to answer many questions, but, as always, persistence pays off and I recalled this article I published on 11-21-10 which every breathing American needs to read until they fully understand what is being presented. I implore all of you to give this your best effort, as it will answer many questions concerning our freedom, and what to expect in the near future. You can do your young adult family members no greater service than to expose them to this informative treatise. Obama will probably use this to make that Alabama Judge look like a fool, if he even bothers to show up! BTW, I’m taking bets he will not show up.

ALSO READ

← The Purpose Behind Engineered Economic Collapse

 

State National

Posted on November 20, 2010 by anticorruptionsocietyLeave a comment

HOW THE SUBJUGATION OF STATE NATIONAL STATUS CAME ABOUT

This information was provided by Wikipedia until for some unknown reason it was deleted.  The entry explains (and confirms Rod Class research) how our country was transformed from a Constitutional Republic of independent states into a federal corporation.

 

State National

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_National#cite_ref-3

 

Foundational Principles

STATE NATIONAL ORIGIN

The premise for the State National is inherent to the Law of Nations and the Principles of Natural Law. Emerich de Vattel noted that every nation that governs itself, under what form so-ever, without dependence on any foreign power, is a sovereign state, its rights are naturally the same as those of any other state. Such are the moral persons who live together in a natural society, subject to the law of nations. To give a nation a right to make an immediate figure in this grand society, it is sufficient that it be really sovereign and independent, that is, that it govern itself by its own authority and laws.[1] The members of a nation carry a nationality of a state/nation, which is considered the international, or external, recognition of a citizen—i.e., the political office or status—as to his or her having belonging to a nation. The country of which they are members are considered to be the state,[2] which refers to estate, or status or condition of the society and its dominion. The lawful dominion of a nation would be considered legitiums principatus (the legitimate owner or principal), from the Latin.

 

THE FEDERATION STATE

The Law of Nations recognizes that several sovereign and independent states may unite themselves together by a perpetual confederacy, without ceasing to be, each individually, a perfect state. They will together constitute a federal republic: their joint deliberations will not impair the sovereignty of each member, though they may, in certain respects, put some restraint on the exercise of it, in virtue of voluntary engagements. A person, i.e., a citizen—the political status, does not cease to be free and independent, when he is obliged to fulfill engagements which he has voluntarily contracted.[3]

 

The United States of America

THE SEVERAL STATES’ INTERNATIONAL AGENT

 

The United States of America is considered a federal republic under the Law of Nations. In essence, the nature of the Constitution for the United States of America is grounded in private international law, which is the nature of a treaty or an international agreement between nations. From its inception, the federal government of the United States of America was created to function as a constitutionally limited federation state. In practical sense, this contracted state is fundamentally an agent for several states of the American union. Accordingly, the original federal government—i.e., the United States—did not have nationals of its own. Hence, in strict sense, a federation state is neither a country nor a nation but is simply a contractually created entity functioning as a corporate agent in certain capacities for the benefit of its creator(s). Due to the international nature of its existence, the United States appears to be a country and a nation but only in its external sense in regard to constitutionally specified relations it maintains with other nations or federation states. In such regard, Justice Marshall of the Supreme Court of the United States had noted that:

§         “The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property.” [4]

Thus, the make-up of this of federal republic system, known as the United States of America, is a corporation—under the principles of a corporate body politic, over being a nation/state or government—in regard to the principles of being a government body politic.[5] The latter body politic conforms to the principles of the Law of Nations and the Principles of Natural Law in regard to a people.

 

STATE NATIONAL BACKGROUND

As to the principles of the Law of Nations, the State National is to be considered an inherent status that is attached to each state/nation in the Union.[6] Prior to the War Between the States and its Reconstruction Acts and Reconstruction Amendments, there was absence of a status entitled “citizen and/or national of the United States” as defined by statute. Generally, before that time, a citizen of the United States meant that such people were a citizen and national of one of the countries within the federal republic known as the United States of America.[7] In adopting the principles of the Law of Nations and the natural law which is attached to it, the American system of law reflected in Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Edition, denotes that country means “the state of which one is a member.” The reference further goes on to illustrate the rules of jus sanguinis and jus soli by setting forth that “Every man’s country is in general the state in which he happens to have been born.” Such reference denotes the nationality of the child being dependent on the condition of the father in regard to the nationality of his father.

 

SUBJUGATION OF STATE NATIONAL STATUS

On July 9, 1868 it is chronicled that the United States implemented the Fourteenth Amendment creating and defining for the first time in American history the person known as a citizen of the United States:

§         “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Prior to the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, and embodied in the Tenth Article in Amendment, the federal government (specifically Congress) could not interfere with the people (representatives) of the American republics/countries. After its implementation,[8] men and women are considered to have dual citizenship, United States citizenship as a primary citizenship, and state citizenship (de facto) as a secondary citizenship. Due to the fact that the United States is a corporate body and not a bona fide nation under the Law of Nations and the Principles of Natural Law, this new status creates the legal entity known as citizen of the United States.[9]

Now, in further exploration of the language found in the Fourteenth Amendment:

§         “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States…”

The wording of privileges and immunities upon citizens of the United States of the Fourteenth Amendment differs from the privileges and immunities clause in the body of the Constitution. Consequently citizens of the United States are legally not entitled to constitutionally enumerated rights due to the fact that they have been voluntarily relinquished. This is a critical element in the distinction between a national of one of the several states and a citizen and national of the United States. The latter which maintains privileges and immunities that are granted, and therefore by definition can be revoked, while the former maintains rights and immunities that are unalienable, and wherefore protected by the Constitution for the United States of America. Therefore, back in reference to the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, it is also of importance that subjugation to jurisdiction is voluntarily and accomplished through the acceptance of benefit through contracte.g., registering to vote and voting, running for any elected office, working for state or federal government, joining the armed forces, registering a child’s birth by certificate, and obtaining a Social Security Number (which includes maintaining bank accounts and credit cards with such number), licenses, welfare and food stamps, unemployment benefits, etc. It can therefore be concluded that individuals who accept these benefits are by default—as evidenced by their overt actions—are acting in rebellion [10] against the system of government provided under natural law.

The question as to why American nationality was introduced and aggressively promoted by certain factions over state nationality after the War deserves consideration:

§         In the years immediately preceding the War Between the States, Northern countries held significant economic advantages while Southern countries possessed superior agricultural land and productivity output by virtue of their larger, low cost, slave population. Historians and scholars opine, therefore, that economic opportunity may have motivated a Northern invasion of the Southern countries (there is no evidence suggesting Southern countries invaded Northern countries and only the opposite has ever been established).

§         Other researchers prefer the argument that Northern countries fought to end slavery. Unfortunately, slavery was common in the North, just not as economically viable as in the agricultural South. In fact the border states remained slave states after the war had ceased. Notwithstanding that the settled research and chronology of fact establishes that the slavery issue was introduced in to the political discourse nearing the end of the war, and subsequently not a justification for it.

§         Lastly, a popular theory for explaining the war rests with the study of Southern countries secession from the Union. However, the original constitutional government for the United States was a voluntary creation of the several states and contractually provides for peaceful secession.

Given the disparity of thought for war justification and general lack of consensus for its implementation, it is practical to look at the issue from the top down instead of the bottom up.

§         Bottom up: conditions in an otherwise civilized coalition of independent countries deteriorated in to an aggressive invasion, total war and the deaths of millions.

§         Top down: there was a post-war desired outcome so the specific reasons for invasion, battles and war are of secondary, and debatable, importance.

Judging by the punitive nature of congressional acts commonly referred to as Reconstruction Law and Reconstruction Amendments enacted pursuant to the War (punitive in the sense of deteriorating individual liberties, restrictions upon individuals, and congressional jurisdiction over formerly free men), it is conceivable that much was pre-written before the war including pre-planned objectives. Evidence of this can be no clearer than the “conversion” from state nationals—with their unalienable rights (as protected by the Constitution)—into the de facto citizens of the United States—with their privileges and immunities (as established herein)—within the Fourteenth Amendment. Moreover, it should be noted that the usurpation of the lawful governmental system of natural law is found in state constitutions where primary allegiance to the United States is mandatory.[11]

 

THE STATE NATIONALS OF THE UNION

The term State National—in reference to the American union of states—is used to describe the status of a man or a woman who formally rejects the federal citizenship of the United States, its benefits and disabilities and required political allegiance. Such people assume the rightful status of a national of their nation (commonly referred to as state in American vernacular) of domicile. Such people have been politically disenfranchised [12] and wherefore maintain their peaceful existence in private societies. The operative distinction is that of nationality by lawful right (de jure) verses nationality of fact (de facto) voluntarily accepted in a political contract. There are relatively few de jure nationals in America due to the fact that most Americans have opted to be citizens and nationals of the United States and contract into its privileges, immunities, and liabilities; by operation of law, such people are considered to be in rebellion and are legal entities over being men and women under the principles of natural law.

 

NATIONALITY IS A NATURAL RIGHT

Nationality is a guaranteed natural right by virtue of International law and the Law of Nations. Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Edition, defines nationality as:

§         “The state of a person in relation to the nation in which he was born. A man retains his nationality of origin during his minority, but, as in the case of his domicile of origin, he may change his nationality upon attaining full age; he cannot, however, renounce his allegiance without permission of the government.”

It is understandable, therefore, that the United States Congress had to make the new federal nationality and citizenship a voluntary political choice in order not to infringe upon the natural rights of men and women and consequently in 1868 enacted Public Law 15 United States Statutes at Large, Chapter 249, Pages 223-224 (image herein noted). Interestingly, this declaration by Congress was put in place the day before implementation of the Fourteenth Amendment; therefore providing Congress effective cover respecting the guaranteed right of nationality on the eve of the introduction of ITS own brand of corporate based citizenship and nationality as regulated by the Law of Persons.[13]By the language noted in the Preamble of this Act, it is obvious that the intent of Congress was to strip the allegiance of the citizens/nationals of the several states by preying on their ignorance via operation of law: the 14th Amendment.

The State National in America today understands the nature of events culminating in hundreds of millions of men and women for over 140 years volunteering for citizenship status in a de facto governmental system, and in rebellion against their de jure political rights and lawful system of law. A practical historic reference can be found in history in Roman Civil Law. The poignant, yet unfortunate, irony of the matter is conscientious small-government groups whose quest for freedom, liberty and justice is hampered by their own voluntary insertion in to the de facto body politic wherein they themselves are prima facie insurgents in rebellion of the de jure bodies politic who can assure and protect the very liberties they seek.

 

UNITED STATES’ RECOGNITION OF RIGHTFUL NATIONALITY

Notwithstanding its successful procurement of citizens by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the federal government continues to recognize the State National status.[14] Title 8 of the United States Code (USC) codifies the constitutionally recognized status under “Aliens and Nationality”, which is quasi-public law.[15] The definitions of of Title 8 (Chapter 12, Section 1101) defines a “national” as a person owing permanent allegiance to a state;[16] and further goes on to define that an “alien” is any person not a citizen or national of the United States,[17]which establishes that one is foreign to the political system (under the Fourteenth Amendment).[18] Furthermore, the U.S. Government Printing Office lists the distinct nationalities of the states in Chapter 5.22-5.23 on page 93: Nationalities, etc. Chapter 5.23 shows forms to be used for nouns and adjectives denoting the nationalities of the several states of the Union:[19]

§         “In designating the natives of the States, the following forms will be used: Alabamian, Alaskan, Arizonan, Arkansan, Californian,” and so on.

In contrast to the de jure nationality, the de facto nationality can be found at Title 8 USC §1101(a)(22) – the term “national of the United States” means: (A) a citizen of the United States, or (B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States. Accordingly, such      references establish the distinctions between a State National and a national of the United States within Title 8 of the United States Code.

 

UNITED STATES’ NATIONALITY IS EFFECTIVELY GENOCIDE

Finally we are to consider the concepts of genocide and of cultural genocide representing the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group. Although it cannot be contested that national, political and cultural groups formerly known as nationals of the several states have been systematically exterminated (or nearly), one should independently research the political climate in the District of Columbia (1850-1860) to fully understand the federal government’s appetite for consolidation of power, control over its creator(s) and their resources, and the surreptitious influence thereupon by a stealthy influential nonAmerican force.  NOTE: Follow that link!!!

References

AUTHORITIES

§             Vattel, The Law of Nations (from the French translation)

§             Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Edition

§             Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, 3rd Edition

§             Webster’s Dictionary, 1828

NOTATIONS

§             In reference to the use of “perpetual” in regard to a federal republic by Vattel, the word had this meaning: PERPETUAL. That which is to last without limitation as to time; as, a perpetual statute, which is one without limit as to time, although not expressed to be so (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856). Wherefore, in law it does not mean forever, per se, but means without a specified end to the relationship of the union of nations.

§             It should be noted that prior to the 14th Amendment, the term “alien” meant a person that was not a citizen/national of one of the several states in reference to the federal system. The term in question has appeared in state constitutions (Wisconsin, Bill of Rights, Article I, §15) for property ownership, but was never defined to have meaning in regard to each state being foreign to each other, i.e., someone being an alien from another state in the Union.

FOOTNOTES

1.          ^ Vattel, Book I, Chapter I § 4

2.          ^ Vattel, Book I, Chapter XI § 122

3.          ^ Vattel, Book I, Chapter I § 10

4.          ^ >From the term, United States of America —Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

5.          ^ BODY POLITIC, government, corporations. 1. When applied to the government this phrase signifies the state. 2. As to the persons who compose the body politic, they take collectively the name, of people, or nation; and individually they are citizens, when considered in relation to their political rights, and subjects as being submitted to the laws of the state. 3. When it refers to corporations, the term body politic means that the members of such corporations shall be considered as an artificial person. —Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

6.          ^ Article I, section 8, clause 4 of the United States Constitution expressly gives the United States Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. The term “uniform” serves are prima facie evidence that there is more than one country in regard to naturalization and relates one rule for all, i.e., The United States has the ability to create naturalization law for not only people coming into the United States, but also each individual state.

7.          ^ The Intent of the 14th Amendment: “We intend to make citizenship National. Heretofore, a man has been a citizen of the United States because he was a citizen of some-one of the States: now, we propose to reverse that, and make him a citizen of any State where he chooses to reside, by defining in advance his national [state] citizenship—and our Amendment declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside.” —The Reconstruction Problem, speech of James Blaine, Skowhegan, Maine (August 29, 1866), Page 64.

8.          ^ See issues with the violation of the lawful ratification of amendments to the Constitution under Article V.

9.          ^ Citizen of a State: A citizen of the United States, residing in any state of the Union; Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (see citizens resident in the state). Citizens Resident in the State: Natural Persons who are citizens and residents, and Corporations chartered in the State. —Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, Third Edition

10.     ^ In 1828, Noah Webster defined an insurgent as a person who rises in opposition to civil or political authority and openly and actively resists the execution of laws. He further established that an insurgent differed from a rebel; the insurgent opposes the execution of a particular law or laws; and a rebel attempts to overthrow or change government, or he revolts and attempts to place his country under another authority. Also he noted, all rebels are insurgents, but all insurgents are not rebels.

11.     ^ Allegiance to the United States. Every citizen of this State owes paramount allegiance to the Constitution and government of the United States, and no law or ordinance of the State in contravention or subversion thereof can have any binding force. —North Carolina State Constitution. Article I-Declaration of Rights, Section 5.

12.     ^ Dyett v Turner, 20 Utah 2d 403, Download Case

13.     ^ See The Law of Persons – The Institutes of Roman Law (1892) by Rudolph Sohm. Translated from the 4th Edition of the German by: James Crawford Ledlie, B.C.L., M.A. of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law and of Lincoln College, Oxford.

14.     ^ See Title 8 USC §1101(a) (21) The term “national” means a person owing permanent allegiance to a state. (23) The term “naturalization” means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.

15.     ^ The term quasi-public had never been defined in reference to constitutional law, but is inherent due to the private international law nature of a federal republic.

16.     ^ Within Chapter 12 of Title 8 USC §1101(a)(21)

17.     ^ Within Chapter 12 of Title 8 USC §1101(a)(3)

18.     ^ alien, adj. Owing political allegiance to another country or government; foreign: alien residents. n., An un-naturalized foreign resident of a country. Also called noncitizenView Source

19.     ^ Style Manual: An Official Guide to the Form and Style of Federal Government Printing for 2008, Download Filehttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2008_style_manual&docid=f:chapter5.pdf

20.      

This page was last modified on 18 November 2010 at 01:30. By 20 November 2010 it was deleted completely from Wikipedia.

MORE FROM OLDDOG

I see no reason the reader should not conclude there was an internal political coup just previous to the 14th amendment, and it was intentionally kept in the dark, until the Bankers consolidated their hold over the economy and states. This is the history of the republican party, and it made every attorney in America either a fool, or your sworn enemy. The power in America is in the organization that controls the teaching of law. OF WHICH, the original 13th amendment would have prevented. Do the research, and teach your children to research America’s political history, instead of developing their thumbs dexterity! Maybe they will have enough sense to revolt. See what this old ex-alcoholic patriot accomplished, and be ashamed of your government controlled education. I AM! http://www.barefootsworld.net/

 

 

 

Threatening New Bill H R 1981 Worse Than SOPA PIPA

January 23rd, 2012 by

http://investmentwatchblog.com

Threatening New Bill H R 1981  Worse Than SOPA PIPA – This Bill Entitled “The Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act Of 2011″ Is A Bill With Overly Broadened Language That Greatly Threatens All Of Us.

January 20th, 2012

H.R. 1981: Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011

This Lamar guy just doesn't know when to quit! SOPA/PIPA get scrubbed, no worries, just tell people this bill will keep the children safe! And drop in all the stuff from SOPA/PIPA and the sheep will fall for it. Give up your internet freedom, it's for the children! Pathetic.

 

To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to child pornography and child exploitation offenses.

 

Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith [R-TX21]

Status: This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the House as a whole. Explanation: Although it has been placed on a calendar of business, the order in which legislation is considered and voted on is determined by the majority party leadership. Keep in mind that sometimes the text of one bill is incorporated into another bill, and in those cases the original bill, as it would appear here, would seem to be abandoned. [Last Updated: Dec 17, 2011 6:15AM]

An overzealous bill that claims to be about stopping child pornography turns every Web user into a person to monitor

 

Every right-thinking person abhors child pornography. To combat it, legislators have brought through committee a poorly conceived, over-broad Congressional bill, The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011. It is arguably the biggest threat to civil liberties now under consideration in the United States. The potential victims: everyone who uses the Internet.

The good news? It hasn’t gone before the full House yet.

The bad news: it already made it through committee. And history shows that in times of moral panic, overly broad legislation has a way of becoming law. In fact, a particular moment comes to mind.

In the early 20th Century, a different moral panic gripped the United States: a rural nation was rapidly moving to anonymous cities, sexual mores were changing, and Americans became convinced that an epidemic of white female slavery was sweeping the land. Thus a 1910 law that made it illegal to transport any person across state lines for prostitution “or for any other immoral purpose.” Suddenly premarital sex and adultery had been criminalized, as scam artists would quickly figure out. “Women would lure male conventioneers across a state line, say from New York to Atlantic City, New Jersey,” David Langum* explains, “and then threaten to expose them to the prosecutors for violation” unless paid off. Inveighing against the law, the New York Times 

notedthat, though it was officially called the White Slave Traffic Act (aka The Mann Act), a more apt name would’ve been “the Encouragement of Blackmail Act.”

That name is what brought the anecdote back to me. A better name for the child pornography bill would be The Encouragement of Blackmail by Law Enforcement Act. At issue is how to catch child pornographers. It’s too hard now, say the bill’s backers, and I can sympathize. It’s their solution that appalls me: under language

 approved 19 to 10 by a House committee, the firm that sells youInternet access would be required to track all of your Internet activity and save it for 18 months, along with your name, the address where you live, your bank account numbers, your credit card numbers, and IP addresses you’ve been assigned.

Tracking the private daily behavior of everyone in order to help catch a small number of child criminals is itself the noxious practice of police states. Said an attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation: “The data retention mandate in this bill would treat every Internet user like a criminal and threaten the online privacy and free speech rights of every American.” Even more troubling is what the government would need to do in order to access this trove of private information: ask for it.

I kid you not — that’s it.

As written, The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011 doesn’t require that someone be under investigation on child pornography charges in order for police to access their Internet history — being suspected of any crime is enough. (It may even be made available in civil matters like divorce trials or child custody battles.) Nor do police need probable cause to search this information.

 As Rep. James Sensenbrenner says, (R-Wisc.) “It poses numerous risks that well outweigh any benefits, and I’m not convinced it will contribute in a significant way to protecting children.”

Among those risks: blackmail.

In Communist countries, where the ruling class routinely dug up embarrassing information on citizens as a bulwark against dissent, the secret police never dreamed of an information trove as perfect for targeting innocent people as a full Internet history. Phrases I’ve Googled in the course of researching this item include “moral panic about child pornography” and “blackmailing enemies with Internet history.” For most people, it’s easy enough to recall terms you’ve searched that could be taken out of context, and of course there are lots of Americans who do things online that are perfectly legal, but would be embarrassing if made public even with context: medical problems and adult pornography are only the beginning. How clueless do you have to be to mandate the creation of a huge database that includes that sort of information, especially in the age of Anonymous and Wikileaks? How naive do you have to be to give government unfettered access to it? Have the bill’s 25 cosponsors never heard of J. Edgar Hoover?

You’d thing that Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), who claims on his Web site to be “an outspoken defender of individual privacy rights,” wouldn’t lend his name to this bill. But he co-sponsored it! You’d think that the Justice Department of Eric Holder, who is supposed to be friendly to civil libertarians, would oppose this bill. Just the opposite. And you’d think that lots of tea partiers, with all their talk about overzealous government and intrusions on private industry, would object.

But they haven’t.

As Julian Sanchez recently wrote on a related subject, “In an era in which an unprecedented quantity of information about our daily activities is stored electronically and is retrievable with a mouse click, internal checks on the government’s power to comb those digital databases are more important than ever… If we aren’t willing to say enough is enough, our privacy will slip away one tweak at a time.”

Image credit: Flickr user MonkeyManForever*The piece originally stated that David Langum was affiliated with the University of Chicago. In fact, the only connection is that the quoted argument was published by the University of Chicago Press. Thanks to the alert reader who caught my error.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/the

-legislation-that-could-kill-internet-privacy-for-good/242853/

Record keeping text here:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=

h112-1981&version=rh&nid=t0%3Arh%3A44

The hardcore tracking bits come from U.S. Code title 18 Part 1 Chapter 121 Section 2703

(2) A provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service shall disclose to a governmental entity the— (A) name; (B) address; (C) local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations; (D) length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized; (E) telephone or instrument number or other subscriber number or identity, including any temporarily assigned network address; and (F) means and source of payment for such service (including any credit card or bank account number),

source:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/

usc_sec_18_00002703—-000-.html

Please note: they get this info IF (and only if):

(1) A governmental entity may require a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service to disclose a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications) only when the governmental entity— …. (E) seeks information under paragraph (2).

(2) A provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service shall disclose to a governmental entity the— (A) name; (B) address; (C) local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations; (D) length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized; (E) telephone or instrument number or other subscriber number or identity, including any temporarily assigned network address; and (F) means and source of payment for such service (including any credit card or bank account number),

(3) A governmental entity receiving records or information under this subsection is not required to provide notice to a subscriber or customer.

tl’dr: Whenever the government wants something, they get it. The only “new” bit is the IP address disclosure. If you don’t upvote this I fully expect you to repost it as much as possible.

EDIT: The time constraints are also altered thanks to jackerran for pointing this out.

From wikipedia:

Representative Zoe Lofgren, (D-Calif.) one of the most vocal opponents of the bill, presented an amendment to rename the Bill the “Keep Every American’s Digital Data for Submission to the Federal Government Without a Warrant Act.”

Best amendment ever.

 

internet-privacy

 

 

Americas Last Chance

January 22nd, 2012 by

 

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28669

paulcraigroberts.com

 

By Paul Craig Roberts

 

 

America has one last chance, and it is a very slim one. Americans can elect Ron Paul President, or they can descend into tyranny.

Why is Ron Paul America’s last chance?

Because he is the only candidate who is not owned lock, stock, and barrel by the military-security complex, Wall Street, and the Israel Lobby.

All of the others, including President Obama, are owned by exactly the same interest groups. There are no differences between them. Every candidate except Ron Paul stands for war and a police state, and all have demonstrated their complete and total subservience to Israel. The fact that there is no difference between them is made perfectly clear by the absence of substantive issues in the campaigns of the Republican candidates.

Only Ron Paul deals with real issues, so he is excluded from “debates” in which the other Republican candidates throw mud at one another: “Gingrich voted $60 million to a UN program supporting abortion in China.” “Romney loves to fire people.”

The mindlessness repels.

More importantly, only Ron Paul respects the US Constitution and its protection of civil liberty. Only Ron Paul understands that if the Constitution cannot be resurrected from its public murder by Congress and the executive branch, then Americans are lost to tyranny.

There isn’t much time in which to revive the Constitution. One more presidential term with no habeas corpus and no due process for US citizens and with torture and assassination of US citizens by their own government, and it will be too late. Tyranny will have been firmly institutionalized, and too many Americans from the lowly to the high and mighty will have been implicated in the crimes of the state. Extensive guilt and complicity will make it impossible to restore the accountability of government to law.

If Ron Paul is not elected president in this year’s election, by 2016 American liberty will be in a forgotten grave in a forgotten grave yard.

Having said this, there is no way Ron Paul can be elected, for these reasons:

Not enough Americans understand that the “war on terror” has been used to create a police state. The brainwashed citizenry believe that the police state is making them safe from terrorists.

Liberals, progressives, and the left-wing oppose Ron Paul, claiming that “he would abolish the social safety net, privatize Social Security and Medicare, throw the widows and orphans into the street, abolish the Federal Reserve,” etc.

Apparently, liberals, progressives, and the left-wing do not understand that privatizing Social Security and Medicare and destroying the social safety net are policies that many conservative Republicans favor and are policies that Wall Street is forcing on both political parties. In contrast, a President Ron Paul would be isolated in the White House and would never be able to muster the support of Congress and the powerful interest groups to achieve such radical changes. Moreover, Ron Paul has made it clear that a welfare-free state cannot be achieved by decree but only by creating an economy in which opportunity exists for people to stand on their own feet. Ron Paul has said that he does not support ending welfare before an economy is created that makes a welfare state unnecessary.

Candidate Paul cannot take any steps to reassure Americans that he would not throw them to the mercy of the free market, because his libertarian base would turn on him as another unprincipled politician willing to sacrifice his principles for political expediency. If libertarians were not inflexible, candidate Paul could endorse Ron Unz’s proposal to solve the illegal immigration problem by raising the minimum wage to $12 an hour, so that Americans could afford to work the jobs that are taken by illegals.

Economist James K. Galbraith is probably correct that Unz’s proposal would boost the economy by injecting purchasing power and that the unemployment would be largely confined to illegals who would return to their home country. However, if Ron Paul were to treat Unz’s proposal as one worthy of study and consideration, libertarian ideologues would write him off. Whatever liberal/progressive support he gained would be offset by the loss of his libertarian base.

Why can’t libertarians be as intelligent as Ron Unz and see that if the Constitution is lost all that remains is tyranny?

In short, Americans cannot see beyond their ideologies to the real issue, which is the choice between the Constitution and tyranny.

So we hear absurd accusations that Ron Paul, a libertarian “is a racist.” “Ron Paul is an anti-semite.” “Ron Paul would favor the rich and hurt the poor.”

We don’t hear “Ron Paul would restore and protect the US Constitution.”

What do Americans think life will be like in the absence of the Constitution? I will tell you what it will be like, but first let’s consider the obstacles Ron Paul would face if he were to win the Republican nomination and if he were to be elected president.

In my opinion, if Ron Paul were to win the Republican nomination, the Republican Party would conspire to refuse it to him. The party would simply nominate a different candidate.

If despite everything, Ron Paul were to end up in the White House, he would not be able to form a government that would support his policies. Appointments to cabinet secretaries and assistant secretaries that would support his policies could not be confirmed by the US Senate. President Paul would have to appoint whomever the Senate would confirm in order to form a government. The Senate’s appointees would undermine his policies.

What a President Ron Paul could do, assuming Congress, controlled by powerful private interest groups, did not impeach him on trumped up charges, would be to use whatever forums that might be permitted him to explain to the public, judges, and law schools that the danger from terrorists is miniscule compared to the danger from a government unaccountable to law and the Constitution.

The reason we should vote for Ron Paul is to signal to the powers that be that we understand what they are doing to us. If Paul were to receive a large vote, it could have two good effects. One could be to introduce some caution into the establishment that would slow the march into more war and tyranny. The other is it would signal to Washington’s European and Japanese puppets that not all Americans are stupid sheep. Such an indication could make Washington’s puppet states more cautious and less cooperative with Washington’s drive for world hegemony.

What America Without the Constitution Will Be Like

In the January 4 Huff Post, attorney and author John Whitehead reported on the militarization of local police. Some police forces are now equipped with spy drones. Whitehead reports that a drone manufacturer, AeroVironment Inc., plans to sell 18,000 drones to police departments throughout the country. The company is also advertising a small drone, the “Switchblade,” which can track a person, land on the person and explode.

How long before Americans will be spied upon or murdered as extremists at the discretion of local police?

Recognizing the privacy danger, if not the murder danger, the American Civil Liberties Union has issued a report, “Protecting Privacy From Aerial Surveillance.” https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/protectingprivacyfromaerialsurveillance.pdf

The ACLU believes, correctly, that liberty is threatened by “a surveillance society in which our every move is monitored, tracked, recorded, and scrutinized by authorities.”

The ACLU calls on Congress to legislate privacy protections against the police use of drones. I support the ACLU because it is the most important defender of civil liberty despite other misguided activities, but I wonder what the ACLU is thinking. Congress and the federal courts have already acquiesced in the federal government’s warrantless spying on Americans by the National Security Agency. The Bush regime violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act many times, and all involved, including President Bush, should have been sent to prison for many lifetimes, as each violation carries a 5-year prison term. But the executive branch emerged scot free. No one was held accountable for clear violations of US statutory law.

The ACLU might think that although the federal executive branch has successfully elevated itself above the law, state and local police forces are still accountable. We must hope that they are, but I doubt it.

The militarization of local police has received some attention. What has not received attention is that state and local police are also being federalized. It is not only military armaments and spy technology that local police are receiving from Washington, but also an attitude toward the public along with federal oversight and the collaboration that goes with it. When Homeland Security, a federal police force, comes into states, as I know has occurred in Georgia and Tennessee, and doubtless other states, and together with the state police stop cars and trucks on Interstate highways and subject them to warrantless searches, what is happening is the de facto deputizing of the state police by Homeland Security. This is the way that Goering and Himmler federalized into the Gestapo the independent police forces of German provinces such as Prussia and Bavaria.

Homeland Security has expanded its warrantless searches far beyond “airline security.” The budding gestapo agency now conducts warrantless searches on the nation’s highways, on bus and train passengers, and at Social Security offices. On Tuesday January 3, 2012, the Social Security office in Leesburg, Florida, apparently a terrorist hotspot, became a Homeland Security checkpoint. The DHS Gestapo armed with automatic weapons and sniffer dogs demanded IDs from local residents visiting their local Social Security office. http://www.dailycommercial.com/News/LakeCounty/010412shield

Thomas Milligan, district manager for the Social Security Administration office, said staff were not informed their offices were about to be stormed by armed federal police officers. DHS officials refused to answer questions asked by local media and left with no explanation at noon, reports infowars.com.

The DHS gestapo justified its takeover of a Leesburg Florida Social Security office as being an integral part of “Operational Shield,” conducted by the Federal Protective Service to detect “the presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities.”

One wonders if even brainwashed flag-waving “superpatriots” can miss the message. The Social Security office of Leesburg, Florida, population 19,086 in central Florida is not a place where terrorists devoid of proper ID might be visiting. To protect America from the scant possibility that terrorists might be congregating at the Leesburg Social Security office, the tyrants in Washington sent the Federal Protective Service at who knows what cost to demand ID from locals visiting their Social Security office.

What is this all about except to establish the precedent that federal police, a new entity in American life, the Federal Protective Service, has authority over state and local police offices and can appear out of the blue to interrogate local citizens.

Why the ACLU thinks it is going to get any action out of a Congress that has accommodated the executive branch’s destruction of habeas corpus, due process, and the constitutional and legal prohibitions against torture is beyond me. But at least the issue is raised. But don’t expect to hear about it from the “mainstream media.”

Americans in 2012, although only a few are aware, live in a concentration camp that is far better controlled than the one portrayed by George Orwell in 1984. Orwell, writing in the late 1940s could not imagine the technology that makes control of populations so thorough as it is today. Orwell’s protagonist could at least have hope. In 2012 with the erasure of privacy by the US government, protagonists can be eliminated by hummingbird-sized drones before they can initiate a protest, much less a rebellion.

Never in human history has a people been so easily and willingly controlled by a hostile government as Americans, who are the least free people on earth. And a large percentage of Americans still wave the flag and chant USA! USA! USA!

The Bush regime operated as if the Constitution did not exist. Any semblance of constitutional government that remained after the Bush years was terminated when Congress passed and President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act. One wonders how the National Rifle Association, the defender of the Second Amendment, will now fare. If there is no Constitution, how can there be a Second Amendment? If the President, at his discretion, can set aside habeas corpus and due process and murder citizens based on unproven suspicions, why can’t he set aside the Second Amendment?

Indeed, it is folly to expect a police state to tolerate an armed population.

The NRA is very supportive of the police and military. Now that these armed organizations are being turned against the public, how will the NRA adjust its posture?

Many NRA members, pointing to the “Oath Keepers,” former members of the military who pledge to defend the Constitution, and to police chiefs who support the Second Amendment, believe that the police and military will disobey orders to attack citizens. But we already witness constantly the gratuitous brutality of “our” police against peaceful protesters. We witness military troops all over the world murder citizens who protest government abuses. Why can’t it happen here?

If you don’t want it to happen here, you had better figure out some way to get Ron Paul into the Presidency and to get him a cabinet and subcabinet that will support him.

Meanwhile, the police state grows. On January 4, 2012, the Obama regime announced by decree, not by legislation, the creation of the Bureau of Counterterrorism which will among other tasks “seek to strengthen homeland security, countering violent extremism.” http://newsok.com/obama-launches-bureau-of-counterterrorism/article/feed/332475

Take a moment to think. Do you know of any “violent extremism” happening in the US? The regime is telling you that it needs a new police bureau with unaccountable powers to “strengthen homeland security” against a nonexistent bogyman.

So who will be the violent extremists who require countering by the Bureau of Counterterrorism? It will be peace activists, the Occupy Wall Street protesters, the unemployed and foreclosed homeless. It will be whoever the police state says. And there is no due process or recourse to law.

Given the facts before you, you are out of your mind if you think Ron Paul’s rhetoric against the welfare state is more important than his defense of liberty.

 

DESTRUCTION

 


SEO Powered By SEOPressor