Categories » ‘Executive Orders’
March 6th, 2014 by olddog
By Bradlee Dean
March 5, 2014
As I travel the road of life, I find it very interesting how men who lived so long ago and experienced so much of life were able to see what was coming in the future, not to mention what they saw in their own day. Aristotle could not have hit the nail on the head any closer than this:
“Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.”
I remember looking at a book once that was titled “What Men Have Learned from History.” As I opened the 100-page book, I found that the pages were all blank. The point was well made. Men do not learn from history. Unfortunately, society has proven this to be the case over and over again. In America today you can see the clear digression of society. What was once evil in our eyes some now call good. The high standards of virtue and morality that were once considered to be the foundation of our families are now laughed at and called “old fashioned” and “outdated.”
We now live in a nation where “tolerance” has become some sort of virtue, and “intolerance” for the things that go against God’s Word is called “hate.” The truth is God is love (1 John 4:8), and God gave His Law because He loves. Yet, America has now become so wise in her own eyes that its people have become fools (Romans 1:22).
Those who fought, bled, and died for our country to establish our Constitution, those who sacrificed to make us free were looked upon as heroes. Now, those who stick to the Constitution and fight to make sure it is adhered to are demonized, criticized by the state-run media and labeled “intolerant haters.”
We now live in a country where “evangelical Christians” are labeled by our own military as No. 1 on the list of terrorists; when if it were not for the “evangelical Christians” found in the “Black-Robed Regiment” who fought to give us this country, we would not have a nation to label anyone anything.
Then there are the do-nothings who give way to apathy. They say, “This is America, it will never happen here!” – as they look at the blank pages in the book of history once again and ignore all the signs of the times that clearly point out tyranny in our government, lawlessness and an attack against all that is good.
What has happened, America? Why have we given over to this change from the founding values of our great nation to the lawlessness we see today? The Bible clearly says in Proverbs 24:21, “… meddle not with them that are given to change.” So why are we changing?
America for the most part has cowered shamefully and refused to lawfully fight against evils.
It was Abraham Lincoln who said, “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”
Are we allowing our nation to be destroyed? Yes. Are we seeing judgment turned backwards? Yes. But the real question is, are YOU willing to stand up and do something about it? ________ (Your answer here). That remains to be seen.
It’s time for Americans to rise up, learn from the past, and say enough is enough.
Maybe we all could use a little lesson from those who are labeled “old and confused.”
One evening, a grandson was talking to his grandmother about current events. The grandson asked his grandmother what she thought about the shootings at schools, the computer age, and just things in general.
The Grandma replied, "Well, let me think a minute. I was born before television, penicillin, polio shots, frozen foods, Xerox, contact lenses, Frisbees and the pill. There was no radar, credit cards, laser beams or ballpoint pens.
Man had not invented panty hose, air conditioners, dishwashers or clothes dryers, and the clothes were hung out to dry in the fresh air, and man hadn't yet walked on the moon.
Your grandfather and I got married first – and then lived together. Every family had a father and a mother. Until I was 25, I called every man older than I, 'Sir.' We were before gay rights, computer dating, dual careers, daycare centers, and group therapy. Our lives were governed by the Ten Commandments, good judgment, and common sense. We were taught to know the difference between right and wrong, and to stand up and take responsibility for our actions.
Serving your country was a privilege; living in this country was a bigger privilege. We thought fast food was what people ate during Lent. Having a meaningful relationship meant getting along with your cousins. Draft dodgers were people who closed their front doors when the evening breeze started. Timesharing meant time the family spent together in the evenings and weekends – not purchasing condominiums.
We never heard of FM radios. And I don't ever remember any kid blowing his brains out listening to Tommy Dorsey. If you saw anything with ‘Made in Japan’ on it, it was junk. The term ‘making out’ referred to how you did on your school exam. Pizza Hut, McDonalds, and instant coffee were unheard of.
We had five and 10-cent stores where you could actually buy things for five and 10 cents. Ice cream cones, phone calls, rides on a streetcar, and a Pepsi were all a nickel. And if you didn't want to splurge, you could spend your nickel on enough stamps to mail 1 letter and two postcards. You could buy a new Chevy Coupe for $600, but who could afford one? Too bad, because gas was 11 cents a gallon.
In my day, ‘grass' was mowed, 'coke' was a cold drink, 'pot' was something your mother cooked in, and 'rock music' was your grandmother's lullaby. 'Aids' were helpers in the Principal's office, 'chip' meant a piece of wood, 'hardware' was found in a hardware store, and 'software' wasn't even a word. We were the last generation to actually believe that a lady needed a husband to have a baby. No wonder people call us 'old and confused' and say there is a generation gap.”
Video: Study The Past
Listen to Bradlee Dean’s radio broadcast, The Sons of Liberty here.
Who is Bradlee Dean?
© 2014 Bradlee Dean – All Rights Reserved
Click here to visit NewsWithViews.com home page.
Bradlee Dean exposes anti-gun mayors who are found out to be criminals. Dean then parallels today's gun-grabbers with dictators in history who promised their citizens protection and freedom under the guise of gun control.
Bradlee Dean is an ordained preacher, heavy metal drummer, talk-show host of the Sons of Liberty Radio, and speaks on college and high school campuses with his ministry, You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International. Contact information for Bradlee Dean
As I see it, if Tolerance and Apathy are the last stage, and I do believe it is, that means we are in big trouble; as in the ship’s sinking and we have no life boats. The International Investment Banking Cartel and their hundreds of thousands of elite minions have done a real number on us while we were sleeping. They stole our intellect, our courage, our will to propagate, and most all of the attributes needed to retain our freedom from tyrannical governance. I agree we’re in deep dodo, but, I cannot justify giving up till the last drop of blood is gone. It matters not if I lose all my friends because they are afraid to join the battle, and take offense when I ask them to participate. It matters not when I make grammatical blunders and expose my ignorance and it matters not when the NSA puts me on a watch list. I would be insulted if they did not. What does matter is, I stood up and fought back. It may cost me my life and or all I have accumulated in a lifetime of labor, but I cannot stand by and do nothing while my family and countrymen are being raped, murdered, imprisoned, bankrupted, and tortured. If you can justify not being involved in enraging by educating people, there are still things you could do, like do not participate in banking. But you must not sit back and do nothing. You have over three hundred million people depending on you, to fight for freedom. If you do nothing but pass this article link on to your contact list, you have done more than most so called American’s. If you are a Christian, there is nothing on earth or in Heaven that can steal your soul. To die in the act of fighting for God’s country is a joy unspeakable. Fear not!
March 5th, 2014 by olddog
Ladies and gentlemen WE HAVE A PROBLEM! Mr. Ewart reports that some so called American’s are complaining that he is too tough, strident and caustic in his articles, to which I say too damned bad. If his complainers had any guts they would wash their own mouth out with soap, and if they had any brains they would apologize to him, and forward his work to everyone they know. America needs a hundred thousand more authors who are even more tough, strident and caustic, to shame those who have no courage or common sense. They should be kissing his ass instead of complaining.
By Ron Ewart
Ladies and gentlemen. We have received some complaints recently that we are being too tough, strident and caustic in our articles. We submit that we aren't being tough enough. The fact is, if we are not stirring your blood, we aren't doing our job. If Americans are so timid and afraid of government that they don't want to hear the truth and from that truth, challenge the government, at any level, then America has absolutely no chance of saving itself ….. from itself. Fear paralyzes and renders the fearful impotent. Fear is the worst enslaver of all. If you fear the government, local, state, or federal, then we strongly suggest you don't read our articles. From our perspective the government, at all levels, has become arrogant, abusive and tyrannical and is fair game, especially to those of us with courage, a free mind and an indomitable spirit.
"The trust of the innocent is the liar's most useful tool." -Stephen King, author
"Power, without honor or trust, is tyranny." -Ron Ewart, national author and speaker
The other night we watched the Crimson Tide movie again with Gene Hackman as Captain Ramsey and Denzel Washington as Executive Officer (XO) Hunter, commanding a nuclear submarine, the Alabama. The Alabama is sent on a mission to destroy a Russian naval and missile base that had been taken over by Russian rebels who were threatening to fire nuclear missiles at the U. S. if the rebel's demands weren't met by the Russian Government. The Alabama received an order from central command to fire their nuclear missiles at the Russian naval base, but while submerged and preparing to launch, it came under attack by a rogue Russian submarine. During the attack a message came in from central command but was cut off mid message. The Alabama ultimately destroyed the Russian submarine, but in the process of the fierce battle, it lost its radio and thus could not confirm the content of the second message.
The crux of the movie was about the dispute between Captain Ramsey and XO Hunter over the decision to fire nuclear missiles and the potential dire consequences, without knowing what was in the second message. The Captain was determined to fire, but the XO was determined to not fire until the 2nd message was received in full. In the end, the radio was fixed, the message came in and central command had rescinded the order to fire the Alabama's nuclear missiles. The Captain was wrong and the XO was proved right, thankfully.
But this time as we watched the movie, it was different somehow. We were suddenly struck by the parallels between the operation of a nuclear submarine and the operation of a Constitutional Republic. A nuclear submarine has virtually more destructive firepower than all the weapons fired in World War II. With 24 nuclear tipped missiles, each having at least 10 nuclear devices in them, a nuclear submarine can rain Hell fire down on targets that will totally obliterate them, along with tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousand lives. That is just one nuclear submarine. The United States has many nuclear submarines.
The United States of America, under the command of the President, controls the firepower of the combined army, navy, air force, marines and coast guard. No nation on earth has this much power in the hands of one man that can pull the "trigger" to save the nation, or pull the "trigger" on an insane whim. The captain of a nuclear submarine and the President of the United States have the same exact awesome responsibility and it is only different in the degree of how much firepower each can unleash. The captain answers to the President. But the President answers to …..?
In theory, a nuclear submarine operates to preserve Democracy, not to practice it. In contrast, and as designed, a Constitutional Republic operates to preserve a Democracy as well, but with a different set of less-rigid instructions. The nuclear submarine operates under the intransigent and fixed Rules of Navy Regulations and a chain of command from which there can be no deviation without serious consequences for the offender. A Constitutional Republic operates under the Supreme Law of the Land, the U. S. Constitution, and the laws that are passed in concert with the Supreme Law by a representative government. Consequences to any violators of the Supreme Law are left up to the people, that is if the people care to hold the violators to account.
On a nuclear submarine, or any other American Navy vessel, the captain is the supreme leader and the supreme law, subject to the Rules of Navy Regulations. In a nuclear submarine, "boys are trained to do a terrible and unthinkable thing, and if that ever occurs the only reassurance they will have that they are doing the right thing will derive from their unqualified belief in the unified chain of command", (from the movie) as delineated in the Rules of Navy Regulations. Each member of the boat's crew (a submarine is a boat, a surface vessel is a ship) must have an undying belief in the capability of the captain to fulfill the duties for which he is charged, in the hopes that in the performance of those duties he will not needlessly sacrifice the crew, or violate the Rules of Navy Regulations. That strong belief finds its foundation in the words immortalized by General Douglas McArthur ….. duty, honor, country.
Exhaustive training hones the captain and the crew to act as one, within the capabilities of the boat, in the fulfillment of the captain's duties. The human weaknesses associated with power and ambition and the uncontrolled emotions of irrationality, anger, or overt compassion can cloud the captain's ability to fulfill those duties and so the crew is taking that risk when sailing with any captain. Nevertheless, the crew can in no way affect, alter, or modify the captain's decisions, for that would be mutiny. The captain has absolute power on the boat and his words and deeds cannot be questioned, unless he is in violation of the Rules of Navy Regulations, which did occur in the Crimson Tide movie. The fact is, it is impossible to effectively prosecute a war by a committee, governed by Robert's Rules of Order, if the goal is to win the war.
So let's analyze the contrast between a submarine crew and the American citizen. Under the U. S. Constitution, the American citizen has considerably more latitude to alter or modify the government of a Constitutional Republic than a ship's crewmember has on any water-born vessel, where the captain has absolute power. In fact, in a Constitutional Republic, the power of the government is derived from the power of the governed, if we are to believe the inviolate words of those that founded this great nation.
In a Constitutional Republic, Americans are supposed to be taught to have trust in their government to do what is necessary and right under the rules of the Supreme Law of the Land, in the direct interest of the preservation of individual liberty and in the direct interest of the preservation of the sovereignty of the nation as a whole. Americans will only have that reassurance that the government is doing the right thing, if they have the unqualified belief and trust that the government will act to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution. Each American must have an undying belief in the capability of the government to fulfill the duties for which government has been charged, in the hopes that those duties will not needlessly sacrifice any one individual, or group of Americans, or will dismantle the foundation of freedom. That strong belief finds its foundation in the meaning of the word, "trust."
If the people do not trust their government to preserve individual liberty, be honest and forthright with the people and be true to their oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, if they cannot trust their government to abide by the rule of law, then the entire system breaks down and we become a nation of the lawless under a lawless government. That condition is a recipe for the declaration of martial law and the path to fascism, or a dictatorship.
When the president of the United States, members of Congress, or any chief executive or members of a legislative, city, county, or state body, willfully lie to the American people to deceive them for political purposes, or ulterior motives, there can be no trust in government, or the rule of law and the system is on its way to breaking down. When law becomes so complex, complicated and undecipherable such that there is no way for the people to reasonably comply with the law, the system HAS broken down. In these trying times of a divided nation over two radically opposing ideologies, America finds itself at the merging of these two conditions. Today, government does lie on purpose for political purposes and ulterior motives to deceive the people, government has become a power unto itself where it does not respect the rule of law, it only respects its rule by fear and intimidation of the people, and finally, the laws have become so complex, complicated and undecipherable that no normal, reasonable and prudent person can comply with them, making virtually every American a lawbreaker in one form or another.
Lying by one person for whatever reason is deceit. Lying by government on purpose for ulterior motives or to increase its power over the masses is racketeering, corruption and quite possibly fascism. As Stephen King stated, "the trust of the innocent is the liar's most useful tool." If the people are so innocent, naive and uninformed, then they have no defense against a lying and corrupt government, nor do they have any redress against unconstitutional or complicated laws for which there is no way to comply.
But the fact is ladies and gentlemen, we cannot with these words change the mindset of a nation who does not care who leads them, or are collectively oblivious to their leader's existence, or the rules under which they lead. We cannot make people cognizant of reality or convince them that their "innocence and ignorance is the liar's (government) most useful tool." We cannot awaken a nation that does not want to be awakened, or a nation that is perfectly comfortable with its ignorance, apathy and mindless slumber.
You cannot by force or other means, convince an alcoholic to mend his ways if the alcoholic does not fervently want to mend his ways. And thus it stands that one person or a thousand voices cannot by force or other means, convince a nation that it lies on the path to ruin, until that nation as a whole gains the collective mindset that it wants to detour from that path. Even if ten thousand voices shouted freedom from the rooftops, as they are now doing all over America in print, on the Internet and on the air, urging the people to see the "light", it still will not be enough if a high percentage of the masses refuse to be awakened. As just one author with a limited audience, we might as well stand on the top of a mountain and blow into the east wind for all the impact we are having.
Whether a sea ship captain, or the president of the United States, the ability to govern effectively rests solely on the trust of the people over which each must command. Without that trust, without honor in the leaders and in the people, government breaks down and when government breaks down due to lack of trust and honor, so order must breakdown as well. This is what we see in Syria, the Ukraine, the Sudan and Venezuela, or any other country where trust in the government has evaporated. When trust and order break down, what takes its place is disorder, mayhem, brutality, carnage, disease and death. This is the not too distant future of America if it continues down the path it now treads.
The question remains, will that nation once conceived in liberty, gain the necessary collective mindset in time before all trust and honor are gone and disorder, mayhem, brutality, carnage, disease and death sets in, because the liars (government) used the people's innocence and ignorance to enslave them.
But then, as a humble writer with a limited audience, there is no way we can predict what the future holds. The outcome depends solely on whether enough Americans will awaken from their innocence, ignorance, apathy and mindless slumber ….. in time. All we can do is provide truthful information and sound the alarm and we are doing so with our weekly articles and on our two powerful websites HERE and HERE. But is anyone listening? If responses to our articles are any indication, it would appear not.
Click on the link to view the video. We think you will get a kick out of it.
© 2014 Ron Ewart — All Rights Reserved
Ron Ewart, a nationally known author and speaker on freedom and property issues and author of his weekly column, "In Defense of Rural America", is the President of the National Association of Rural Landowners, (NARLO) a non-profit corporation headquartered in Washington State and dedicated to restoring, maintaining and defending property rights for urban and rural landowners. Mr. Ewart can be reached by e-mail.
March 4th, 2014 by olddog
I am writing here of military personnel, and in particular, American military personnel. There is a good reason for this discourse, because it is a proven fact that people kill people for reasons they do not always understand or even care about, and if one is a God fearing person, or just a compassionate person, they should.
The German soldiers who were dressed in Polish uniforms, and instructed to kill their fellow Germans in the second world war, may or may not have, been given instructions to follow those orders because it was imperative to conquer Poland for the protection of the homeland, and to get the peoples support for Nation Building. Who Knows! I don’t pretend to know all there is to know about this event, and I’m using it to open the readers mind to something important in today’s political climate. Events like this do happen, (911 and the Bush administration) (Sandy Hook) (and many others) and I find it hard to swallow if we are going to claim we are compassionate human beings.
There are many so called compassionate Americans who would nuke Russia at the drop of hat, and there are also many so called compassionate Americans who would make a fortune if certain people would drop one on America so we could drop many on China, Russia, or various nations in the Middle East.
Getting rich at the expense of human lives being lost is not compassionate, and if the reader believes our government is always correct in their decisions to kill other people, then I fear for your soul, because it is surely not compassionate, or very smart, and you are close to being one of those soldiers who kill on command.
So what is a low ranking new soldier supposed to do? How about a seasoned soldier of high rank?
Let’s consider that the reason one is a soldier is to protect his country at all cost, which includes his/her life, and orders are orders, which must be followed without question. Then what? Is the chain of command so infallible they never make mistakes? I hardly think so, and we as compassionate human beings must be allowed to follow our conscience if we are to avoid being used by people with no conscience. And we cannot do that and remain ignorant. Don’t forget, our so called President is the Commander in Chief of our military, and the one who gave himself the power to kill us, in spite of having no available information on his past.
AND THAT, DEAR READER IS THE REAL REASON FOR THIS DISCOURSE.
Every human being must accept the responsibility to become informed on the methods being used by the powers that be. Otherwise we will be trapped into committing atrocities we will not be able to live with, like killing people for no good reason. Only self-defense or protection of family, and in some cases property, can justify killing a person.
Even if you just vote a tyrant into a position of power over other people, you are still responsible for their actions, because you could have researched his/her past to see what kind of person they were, (Except for OBUMA) or you could have demanded some kind of acceptable proof of their abilities and purpose.
We cannot go through life without accepting responsibility for our leaders, and if we continue doing so, we are headed for destruction. Look around, and see for yourself, our government has turned into a monster, hell bent on destroying our life with their control over every item we need for survival.
The privatization of all natural resources will subject us to an absolutely miserable life style, with no means of recourse. Is the pleasure of being uninformed worth living in a world of total subjection? Are we so ignorant we will accept tyranny, just so we can avoid a little reading? Do we want to be so desperate we will kill our neighbor for a loaf of bread? Do we give a tyrannical government our support just so we can have an excuse to sit on our ass and watch TV instead of learning how and what they are doing behind our backs; just because they say they represent America? Just by being alive we should have enough sense to see they are stealing our future, as well as our present way of life.
So, what are our options?
There are over 1,600 articles on my two sites alone http://anationbeguiled.com and http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com , plus the internet is running over with Patriot sites, for now! These articles have been chosen because they contribute to understanding what is going on in America and the world that contributes to the destruction of freedom and Constitutional Governance. And, the number one reason these things are happening is the appalling ignorance and lack of interest in our citizens. Folks, you simply cannot remain uninformed and free. It’s either knowledge and freedom, or ignorance and no freedom!
May I humbly suggest you begin a reading program of as many dissident authors as you can find, and empty your mind of all loyalty to any of the existing political parties in America. You cannot stand in the river and get dry. We must create an informed society on the methods the International Investment Banking Cartel is using to subjugate the entire planet we live and depend on. Stop voting and start learning why. Information is to your mind, like Viagra is to your?
If you want it to work right you have to give it some nourishment.
Every minute you watch television is like an open wound bleeding your life away.
It’s true that ignorant people cannot cure a big problem, and it’s also true that an informed society can cure any problem. The people who formed our government never intended it to be like it has become, and the way it failed is because the people refused to do their part. Your part Mr. and Mrs. America is to learn why adhering to a particular set of principles is the only way we can deal with an ever expanding group of politicians who act as if they can do anything with our country they find profitable. There are rules in every society; otherwise we would be an anarchic pot of hobo soup, willing to try anything that tickles our fancy. A Democracy simply means 51% of the people can demand how the 49% live, and if you are stupid enough to want that, let me be the first to hold and protect your money. Let me be the first to keep your wife warm on cold nights while you are away. The majority is a non elected tyrant!
Laws must be made in conformance with an existing set of principles, or we have no future security in anything. What ever sounds good at the moment is no substitute for intelligent problem solving. Or Nation Building, which by the way, we were not intended to be. The founders saw the advantage in having some diversity in governance and provided it by setting up the States as limited but free to adjust to particular circumstances, and the federal Government confined to only those explicit areas elucidated in the Constitution, and further confined by the Bill of Rights which is about to die on the vine of tyranny.
Getting back to the soldiers, and their commanders demanding absolute obedience regardless of sane treatment of the people. How will we deal with a soldier who has been instructed to kill us for some perceived wrong we may or may not have done. They are not supposed to be law-men anyway. That’s yet another protection we have lost, due to diversity in governance.
There is also the nationwide problem of local police officers becoming absolute brutes and getting away with it, to the point of publically bragging about their freedom to do what ever they liked, with no fear of retribution. As a matter of fact they can now get paid leave for brutalizing some citizen, and they openly confess it’s how they get extra paid time off. Go home with pay and behave for a week until this cools down, is how they are admonished. This is AMERICA???!
Are you aware that the old practice of extortion has arisen, and police officers are demanding money if you want to remain healthy and in business? If the thugs try it they are murdered with impunity, as it’s now the officers domain.
Any one who is still convinced that America is the land of the free and the home of the brave is mentally retarded. Go to http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com and read Mr. Whiteheads article, Free Speech RIP A Relic of the American Past!
How much will you take America, before you stand up and fight back?
February 25th, 2014 by olddog
Stockman – $500 Trillion Derivative Bomb Threatens The World!
Today David Stockman warned King World News that a terrifying $500 trillion derivative bomb threatens the entire world. He also went on to caution about a second danger facing the world. KWN takes Stockman’s warnings very seriously because he is the man former President Reagan called on in 1981, during that crisis, to become Director of the Office of Management and Budget and help save the United States from collapse. Below is what Stockman had to say in part II of a series of powerful interviews that will be released today.
Stockman: “I think the great ticking time bomb is interest rate swaps. The last time I checked they were in the range of $500 trillion. Who knows what’s lurking underneath the surface there?….
Stockman: “The single greatest danger is that the game the central banks are playing today will come to an abrupt and destructive end. That’s the danger because the whole system is now running off the short-run maneuvers, liquidity, and guidance that the central banks are injecting into the market every day. The danger is that one of these days the whole system will fail because it is unnatural and artificial, and when that happens it’s going to be a pretty difficult (and chaotic) time.” read more!
Just think a moment, the International Investment Bankers have been sucking our country dry for more years than anyone on earth has lived. Does that make sense folks? when will the people understand they simply cannot have a life of total leisure, we must spend time learning what is going on in our government and discuss what to do about it. By now, the entire world could have financial security if it were not for these blood suckers. Please for the sake of your children and Grand children get off your ass and learn. If I can find and learn what is wrong with the world, there is no excuse for anyone to remain ignorant. There is a way to fix the world. KILL THE BANKERS, and confiscate their wealth! Does that offend you? You don’t seem to get upset when the bankers have millions killed in their wars, while you work in their war factories though, do you? Wake the hell up America!
February 24th, 2014 by olddog
By Ben O'Neill on February 22, 2014
[This article is part of a series. See Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US Courts.]
We begin our analysis of the legal machinations of the NSA by looking at the secret court system which supposedly practices judicial oversight over the agency. This Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court or FISC) was created in 1978 as a result of recommendations of the Church Committee, composed after a series of intelligence scandals in the 1970s. The court was purportedly created as an additional safeguard against unlawful activity by US intelligence agencies, which had been found to have committed various kinds of unlawful surveillance activities.
The goal of the FISA court, as originally conceived, was to place judicial oversight on the surveillance activities of the NSA, by requiring the agency to obtain warrants from the court before intercepting communications. This was to place the NSA under the same kind of legal constraints as regular police, with requirements for evidence being put before a court in order to obtain a warrant for search. However, unlike the court system for regular police warrants, the judicial system for the NSA is far more secretive. In order to give judicial scrutiny to preserve the secrecy of NSA activities, the FISA court meets in secret with only government representatives present at its proceedings. The hearings are closed to the public and the rulings of the judges are classified, and rarely released after the fact. (Some rulings have been partly declassified, but are still heavily redacted.) The judges in the FISA court hear applications from a representative of the NSA, and ask questions, allowing the agency to amend their applications to meet any shortcomings. Adversarial argument from other parties is absent, since there are no other parties at the hearing.
Some of this is similar to the operation of public courts for regular police warrants, but there is a great deal more secrecy, and a great deal more power granted to the government. One distinction between the FISA Court, and regular public courts issuing warrants for police searches, is the type of warrant system that is practiced under the FISA Court. For police searches it is generally the case that the police will apply for a warrant to surveil a particular person, or a small group or people, and give some evidence of “probable cause” for a search, i.e., the police must convince the court that there is reasonable suspicion for surveillance on a case-by-case basis. Under the FISA Court the warrants for the NSA are much wider in scope. Many of the warrants authorize the collection of communications data on a particular phone carrier, capturing the communications of millions of people over sustained periods of time. Other warrants are “procedure-based” warrants which authorize a proposed data-collection process, subject to various “minimization procedures” designed to confine the querying of data. These generally allow mass data-collection on a population, with application of the minimization procedures left to the NSA.
As with other law enforcement authorities, the record of the NSA in obtaining warrants from the FISA court is imposing. In the 33,949 applications that were resolved from 1979-2012, only 11 were rejected (0.0324%). (The rejection rate for other wiretap applications in state and federal courts is similarly low.) Though originally designed merely to issue secret warrants for surveillance, the powers of the FISA Court have expanded over time, with a large expansion of power occurring in 2008, when the Bush administration retroactively immunized any “electronic communication service provider” from any liability for their complicity in unlawful NSA surveillance.
In order to deal with a large number of warrant applications, the powers of the FISA Court have expanded to the point that it has undertaken quasi-constitutional proceedings, allegedly validating the surveillance programs as being within the constitutional powers of the US government. Even in this latter function, the hearings have been closed to the public and have been conducted with only the government giving arguments to the court. Hence, the government has had free rein to be the only party represented at hearings which have purported to determine its own legal powers under the US Constitution. For this reason, one commentator has noted that, “[i]n truth, the FISC has basically become a parallel Supreme Court, but one which operates in almost total secrecy.”
The effect of this secret court system has been to allow the NSA to build up 34 years of judicial precedents in favor of its expansive powers, with a large body of purported constitutional findings validating its own power. All of this has been conducted behind closed doors, without the inconvenience of opposing argument from other parties. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this secret court system has opened up opportunities for judicial capture for the NSA. As noted by legal scholar Elizabeth Goitein, “[l]ike any other group that meets in secret behind closed doors with only one constituency appearing before them, they’re subject to capture and bias.”
For former FISA court judge James Robertson, these remarks have rung true to such an extent that he has publicly complained about the ex parte nature of the FISA court proceedings. According to this former member of the court, “[w]hat FISA does is not adjudication, but approval. This works just fine when it deals with individual applications for warrants, but the 2008 amendment has turned the FISA court into an administrative agency making rules for others to follow.”
To the extent that judicial capture has been resisted by the court, it has nonetheless functioned as a compliant entity to the NSA, through the fact that any criticisms against the unlawful actions of the NSA have been kept secret, and have been without any serious legal consequence to the agency. When the Chief Judge of the FISA court was alerted to a mass of systematic misrepresentations to the court by the NSA, the consequence was a “stern rebuke” in a classified memorandum that was not available to the public until years later. (In fact, the opinion was only declassified due to public pressure as a result of the Snowden leaks. If not for these leaks it is likely that the opinion would still remain classified today.) In March 2009, following breaches of the courts orders, the Chief Judge found that the testimony of General Keith Alexander setting out the NSA interpretation of the court’s orders “strained credulity” by interpreting a part of the orders as effectively being optional. He also found that “[t]he minimization procedures proposed by the government in each successive application and approved and adopted as binding by the orders of the [FISA Court] have been so frequently and systematically violated that it can fairly be said that this critical element of the overall [metadata] regime has never functioned effectively.” Despite lacking confidence that the NSA would comply with future orders, the Chief Judge allowed the mass collection of metadata to continue, and allowed the government to continue to apply for access to this data on a case-by-case basis, or for imminent threats, until such time as they completed a review of their procedures. The NSA completed their review and the regular operation of the mass-surveillance program was restored shortly afterward.
Some commentators have taken this judicial rebuke by the FISA court as proof of the “toughness” of the court on the NSA, in fact, it is proof of their subservience to the agency. Despite finding that there had been systematic misrepresentations to the court by the NSA, no action was taken against official who had given false statements to the court. There was no disciplinary action of any kind against personnel of the agency, and the “rebuke” of the court remained a private classified document, only available to the agency being criticized. NSA officials who had systematically misled the court were free to read this rebuke knowing that no consequence would follow from it, since no member of the public could read about their actions. When the matter was later exposed to the public (as a result of the Snowden leaks) the Chief Judge complained that his court “… is forced to rely upon the accuracy of the information that is provided to the Court.” The surveillance programs of the NSA continued, with ongoing approval by the court, after a short period of technical review conducted by the NSA. Such “toughness” as this is what passes for “checks and balances” within the system of secret courts.
The dubious nature of the FISA court is well-understood within the wider judicial system, a fact which was clear in the Klayman preliminary judgment. The stark distinction between the secretive FISA court and the public court system was recognized by Judge Leon when he observed that, “… no court has ever recognized a special need sufficient to justify continuous, daily searches of virtually every American citizen without any particularized suspicion. In effect, the government urges me to be the first non-FISC judge to sanction such a dragnet.” It is notable here that Judge Leon felt that it was significant that he was the first non-FISC judge to consider the matter, a tacit recognition that the judgments of the FISC cannot be regarded as true constitutional scrutiny.
Legal scholar Randy Barnett has argued that surveillance programs by a secret court violates the requirement for “due process of law.” According to Barnett, “[s]ecret judicial proceedings adjudicating the rights of private parties, without any ability to participate or even read the legal opinions of the judges, is the antithesis of the due process of law.” Though we refer to such an institution as a “court” system in the positive-law sense, in truth, such a “court” lacks many of the characteristics of a proper court. It is in fact more akin to bodies such as the English Star Chamber, which conducted judicial hearings in secret, issuing secret rulings affecting parties who were not represented in its hearings.
February 22nd, 2014 by olddog
Saudi Pakistani and Iraqi Prison Inmates Replenish Al Qaeda Ranks
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Several hundred convicted criminals who escaped from carefully guarded prisons in Iraq have recently joined the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) as well as the Al Qaeda affiliated rebel force, Jabhat Al Nusra.
According to the NYT: “the prison breaks also reflect the surging demand for experienced fighters which led to a concerted effort by militant groups, particularly the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, to seek them in the one place where they were held en masse — Iraq’s prison cells.” (Tim Arango and Eric Schmitt,
Escaped Inmates From Iraq Fuel Syrian Insurgency, NYT, February 12, 2014):
“American officials estimate, a few hundred of the escapees have joined the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, several in senior leadership roles.”
Acknowledged by the NYT, the prison breakouts are part of the recruitment of jihadists to serve in the Syrian insurgency. What is not mentioned, however, is that the recruitment of mercenaries is coordinated by NATO, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar with the support of the Obama administration. Moreover, known and documented, most Al Qaeda affiliated forces are covertly supported by Western intelligence including the CIA, Mossad and Britain’s MI6.
The prison breaks in Iraq are part of a coordinated endeavor entitled “Operation Breaking the Walls,” established in July 2012 by the ISIS. Acknowledged by an American counterterrorism official quoted by the NYT,
“The influx of these terrorists, who collectively have decades of battlefield experience, probably has strengthened the group and deepened its leadership bench.”
US Occupation forces and military personnel in the prisons turned a blind eye to the breakouts.
Abu Aisha was originally arrested by the Americans and then released from Camp Bucca, the infamous American prison in southern Iraq, in 2008. He was rearrested by the Iraqis in 2010.
“Finally, they put me in Abu Ghraib, and I again met some of the leaders and fighters I knew, including princes from Al Qaeda — Iraqis, Arabs and other nationalities,” he said. “Most of them had been at Bucca as well.”
One night last summer, as Abu Aisha sat in his cell waiting, as he did each day, for his date with the executioner, explosions and gunfire erupted and a familiar prison guard opened the doors to his cell and told him to leave immediately. With hundreds of others, Abu Aisha ran through the prison’s corridors until he escaped through a hole that had been blasted through a wall. He hopped into a waiting Kia truck that took him to freedom — and back to the battlefield.
Abu Aisha said leaders of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria gave him a choice: leave and fight with them in Syria, or stay and fight in Iraq. (NYT, op cit, emphasis added)
Prison guards secure the main gate of the newly named Baghdad Central Prison in Baghdad’s Abu Ghraib February 21, 2009.
Credit: Reuters/Mohammed Ameen
Coordinated Program: Saudi Arabia
The recent prison breakouts have the hallmarks of a carefully planned covert operation requiring the complicity of the US military and Iraqi prison personnel.
The prison breakouts are not limited to Iraq. Planned prison escapes to join the jihadist insurgency have occurred simultaneously in several countries, indicating the existence of a coordinated recruitment program.
Saudi Arabia –which has played a central role in channeling weapons (including anti-aircraft missiles) to the jihadists on behalf of Washington– has been actively involved in the recruitment of mercenaries from the kingdom’s prisons.
In Saudi Arabia, however, there were no breakouts: criminals serving jail sentences were released from the kingdom’s prisons on condition they join the Syrian jihad.
A top secret memo sent by the Ministry of Interior in Saudi Arabia “reveals the Saudi Kingdomsent death-row inmates, sentenced to execution by decapitation, to Syria to fight Jihad against the Syrian government in exchange for commuting their sentences.”
According to the April 17, 2012 memo, Saudi Arabia recruited some 1200 inmates, “offering them a full pardon and a monthly salary for their families, who were to remain in the Kingdom, in exchange for “…training for the sake of sending to the Jihad in Syria.”
Among those released from prison and recruited in Saudi Arabia were inmates from Yemen, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Jordan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan, Iraq, and Kuwait.
From “Convicted Criminal” to “Freedom Fighter”
The Western military alliance is not only supporting and financing a terrorist insurgency, supplying it with advanced weapons systems, it is also complicit in the recruitment of convicted criminals.
What is at stake is the coordination of several consecutive stages involving Prison escapes/releases, Recruitment of Mercenaries, the Training of “Freedom Fighters” and the Procurement and Delivery of Weapons to the insurgency:
1. Release and/or escape of convicted criminals and fighters from prisons;
2. Recruitment of the released/escaped inmates into Syria rebel formations;
3. Paramilitary training of the released/escaped prisoners, where applicable, e.g. in Saudi and Qatari training programs including religious indoctrination;
4. Dispatching the newly trained jihadist rebels to the war theater. The former prison inmates are sent to Syria to join the insurgency. They are integrated as mercenaries into one of the Al Qaeda affiliated forces.
5. The military equipping of the newly trained mercenaries (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar) and the procurement and delivery of military hardware to the insurgency on behalf of the US Administration which is funding the inflow of weapons.
The Insurgency’s Recruitment of Prison Inmates: Part of an Ongoing Process
Prison breaks occurred in Summer 2013 in Libya and Pakistan and Iraq in what appeared to be a carefully coordinated program. Those reported by the NYT are a continuation of an earlier project of prison breakouts.
On July 23, 2013, Abu Ghraib and Taji prisons were broken into in a carefully waged operation, leading to the escape of 500-1000 inmates, most of whom were recruited into the ranks of ISIS:
The attacks were allegedly carried out after months of preparations on behalf of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which is a merger between Al-Qaeda’s affiliates in Syria and Iraq.
Between 500 to 1,000 prisoners have escaped as a result of the attack, “most of them were convicted senior members of Al-Qaeda and had received death sentences,” said Hakim Zamili, a senior member of the security and defense committee in parliament.
Suicide bombers drove cars with explosives into the gates of the prison on the outskirts of Baghdad on Sunday night, while gunmen attacked guards with mortar fire as well as rocket propelled grenades. (Russia Today, July 2013)
On Saturday, July 26, at a maximum security prison in Benghazi, Libya, an almost identical prison break to the one that happened in Iraq occurred:
There were riots within the prison, with fires set. Suddenly gunmen flocked upon the prison and opened fire. About 1,200 of Libya’s most deadly inmates escaped. Peregrino Brimah, Obama’s Syria Endgame:
New Al Qaeda “Recruits” Dispatched to Syria, Global Research, September 4, 2013, emphasis added)
And midnight, July 29-30:
Taliban gunmen with rocket launchers and suicide bombers, wearing police uniforms attacked the largest jail in Dera Ismail Khan, in a northern Pakistani province, releasing over 300 inmates. They came well coordinated, with rocket-propelled grenades and freed top militants–some of the Taliban’s most deadly men. They used loud speakers to announce the names of the men they needed. According to an official
(Reuters), only 70 of the 200 guards on duty were at work that fateful night, suggesting higher level security-government involvement.(Ibid, emphasis added)
Syrians across the Country Say No to Terrorism and Foreign Interference
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, February 21, 2014
Url of this article:
We invite GR readers to review the video and images below and make up their own mind as to what is happening in Syria.
There is a mass movement across the country against foreign interference. This mass movement is not being reported by the Western media.
The Syrian population does not support the “freedom fighters” recruited and trained in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.
What is at stake is the sovereignty and survival of a country with a longstanding history. This movement also includes people who are opposed to the Syrian government.
The Syrian people are fully aware that Washington is supporting Al Qaeda. They know that this is a US sponsored insurgency and that the rebels who are killing civilians are mercenaries.
They are fully aware that this is a war of aggression which is intent upon destroying their country.
Let us spread this message far and wide.
Michel Chossudovsky, GR, February 21, 2014
Report by Syria 360
Thousands of Syrians went out in massive rallies in various areas and cities on Thursday in support of Syrian national principles and staunch support to the Syrian Arab Army.
Thousands in Qudsayya show support to Syrian army, national principles
Thousands from Qudsayya, al-Dimas and al-Sabboura areas in Damascus countryside gathered in a massive popular rally in Qudsayya area to show support to the Syrian army operations against the armed terrorist groups and national principles. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZP9FdP7m4Lw
February 20th, 2014 by olddog
By Matthew Clark
The Obama Administration’s Federal Communication Commission (FCC) is poised to place government monitors in newsrooms across the country in an absurdly draconian attempt to intimidate and control the media.
Before you dismiss this assertion as utterly preposterous (we all know how that turned out when the Tea Party complained that it was being targeted by the IRS), this bombshell of an accusation comes from an actual FCC Commissioner.
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai reveals a brand new Obama Administration program that he fears could be used in “pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.”
As Commissioner Pai explains in the Wall Street Journal:
Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its "Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs," or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.
The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about "the process by which stories are selected" and how often stations cover "critical information needs," along with "perceived station bias" and "perceived responsiveness to underserved populations."
In fact, the FCC is now expanding the bounds of regulatory powers to include newspapers, which it has absolutely no authority over, in its new government monitoring program.
The FCC has apparently already selected eight categories of “critical information” “that it believes local newscasters should cover.”
That’s right, the Obama Administration has developed a formula of what it believes the free press should cover, and it is going to send government monitors into newsrooms across America to stand over the shoulders of the press as they make editorial decisions.
This poses a monumental danger to constitutionally protected free speech and freedom of the press.
Every major repressive regime of the modern era has begun with an attempt to control and intimidate the press.
As Thomas Jefferson so eloquently said, "our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost."
The federal government has absolutely no business determining what stories should and should not be run, what is critical for the American public and what is not, whether it perceives a bias, and whose interests are and are not being served by the free press.
It’s an unconscionable assault on our free society.
Imagine a government monitor telling Fox News it needed to cover stories in the same way as MSNBC or Al Jazeera. Imagine an Obama Administration official walking in to the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal and telling it that the American public would be better served if it is stopped reporting on the IRS scandal or maybe that reporting on ObamaCare “glitches” is driving down enrollment.
It’s hard to imagine anything more brazenly Orwellian than government monitors in newsrooms.
Is it any wonder that the U.S. now ranks 46th in the world for freedom of the press? Reporters Without Boarders called America’s precipitous drop of 13 places in its recent global rankings “one of the most significant declines” in freedom of the press in the world.
Freedom of the press is proudly extolled in the First Amendment, yet our nation now barely makes the top fifty for media freedom.
We cannot allow the unfathomable encroachment on our free speech and freedom of the press to continue.
We’ve seen, and defeated, this kind of attempt to squelch free speech before in the likes of the Fairness Doctrine and the Grassroots Lobbying Bill (incidentally one of my first projects at the ACLJ). Each one of these euphemistically named government programs is nothing more than an underhanded attempt to circumvent the Constitution and limit free speech – speech that the government finds inconvenient. They’re equally unconstitutional, and they each must be defeated.
Join the ACLJ as we take a stand. Sign the ACLJ’s Petition to Stop the Obama FCC’s Free Speech Monitors.
This article is crossposted on Red State.
On second thought, what's the big deal? The scumbag media industry is owned by the same dirt bag Bankers that OBUMA works for, so don't get your panties in a wad, we're no worse off than we have been since the big buyout!
February 18th, 2014 by olddog
By Mary E Webster
How do I explain to someone who believes in big government and we are “citizens of the world,” that most of our technological and health advancements, our freedom to work at a job of our choice—or not work, if we don’t want to—and even sit in the church of our choice on Sunday morning is protected by the United States Constitution?
As readers of my essays know, freedom and liberty do not come from the Constitution. They come from God. But God also gave us free will, which means that some type of government is necessary.
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." #51*
We, as citizens of our country, state, county, city, community, give up a few of our rights and freedoms to give power to our governments.
“Government is necessary. The people must cede some of their natural rights to the government to give it some powers.” #2 *
Rather than give us freedoms, the U.S. Constitution takes the bare minimum of freedoms away from citizens, just enough to keep us safe. Before the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, people were "given" their freedoms by government rulers. That is why a "bill of rights" was such a revolutionary agreement between the ruler and citizens.
The Old World doctrine said that people were made to serve kings, not kings to serve the people. . ." #45
"Bills of rights are agreements between kings and their subjects. They reserve to citizens the rights not surrendered to the king.
"The Magna Charta is an example. Barons with swords in their hands made King John sign. Succeeding princes confirmed the Magna Charta. The Petition of Right agreed to by Charles the First is an example. So is the Declaration of Rights presented to the Prince of Orange in 1688. Parliament then made it the 'Bill of Rights'.
"The proposed Constitution is founded on the power of the people. The people's representatives will execute it. Therefore, a bill of rights doesn't belong in the Constitution. The people surrender nothing. And they keep everything. Specific reservations are not needed." #84
However, we can lose our freedoms. We only have to look at the 20th century to see how millions of people lost their freedoms, their property, and even their lives because of unrestrained government. In fact, there were more Christian martyrs in the 20th century than in all previous 1,900 years combined.
What are we to do if we notice the United States passing laws that take away our basic freedoms and liberty?
If the federal government overreaches its authority and uses its power tyrannically, the people, who created it, must go to the Constitution. They must correct the injury done to the Constitution. To determine if a law is Constitutional, we must look at whether the law is based on Constitutional powers…” #33
This is the core of the questions I had when I picked up the Federalist Papers in 1994: "To determine if a law is Constitutional, we must look at whether the law is based on Constitutional powers…” And so that other people can find the answer more quickly than I did, I put together my favorite book: The United States Constitution: Annotated with The Federalist Papers in Modern English.
* All quotes are from The Federalist Papers: Modern English Edition Two, which is available at Amazon.com and on my website.
It was bad enough when society accepted the restrictions on public preaching, but when an entire Nation accepts a restriction on GOD, who made everything that exist, and hence, has a justified claim of ownership on everything that exist, you can guess what happens next.
HE GETS MAD!
Then He withdraws His protection, and things get ugly. If you are one of the fools who rejects GOD’s existence, then you are stupid enough to think governments will protect you, and they give you a bill of right’s to prove it. Guess what, they can also take them away. SO, if you claim there is No GOD, then you have no reason to complain when the government takes back what it gave you. Be careful who you worship! No one is going to take way what GOD gave me. Will you protect your gift of freedom from GOD, or will you let the government claim it? I suggest you buy the book, and read it.
February 15th, 2014 by olddog
INTRODUCTION BY: Jefferson’s Voice and Olddog
(JV) You should consider pointing out in an intro commentary that the idea of a solution of a hero as presented in this paper is elite programming. Some legitimate whistleblowers and people like Aaron Russo can and have served as educators, guides, and inspiration. HOWEVER, the answer to our problems is most definitely not waiting for the emergence of such a hero – instead we must begin acting NOW on individual and community levels. No excuses. No smoke and mirrors. No delusional thinking.
(OD) Begin by decentralizing away from their planned society by not being dependent on their system of corporate control of the necessities of life, by Home Schooling, Growing your own food, Mending your own clothes and tools whenever possible, Policing your own neighborhood, and most pressing, protecting your own financial assets. Starting a Community Watch, Community idea sharing meetings, getting to know your neighbor gives you an opportunity to educate them on the new world order, and why it is so important to abandon their system. Americans must re-learn how to be independent individuals again.
(JV) I find it nauseating that the author called an Establishment rag "venerable", The Guardian is the UK version of the NY Times, and again we KNOW Greenwald is complicit and Snowden's story doesn't add up (is Snowden a patsy or an agent, who knows?). The author mentions Assange, we know Assange is an agent, one that rudely decries 9/11 Truth. For God's sake Assange has a Rothschild lawyer! Snowden and Assange are free men. The only true whistleblower mentioned is Manning and he is behind bars, isolated, not given the showy media attention of Snowden and Assange.
(OD) Note: we are not running Mr. Van Schalkwyk down, we’re just introducing important things not mentioned.
Kicking off this week's edition of The Room, former South African Supreme Court Judge and periodic contributor to these pages Rex van Schalkwyk will discuss the disturbing and accelerating global trend towards totalitarianism, focusing on technology's crucial role in determining the victor of the battle between lovers and haters of liberty.
Rex Van Schalkwyk, Contributing Author
Harlan K. Ullman is the chairman of the Killowen Group, which advises leaders in government and business, and the former national security advisor to Presidents Gerald Ford and George H. W. Bush. He is also the author of the "shock and awe" doctrine, which was used to such effect in the Iraqi wars. Writing for the Atlantic Council, an influential think tank based in Washington, DC, he argued that "non-state actors" have the power to threaten the "state-centric system of the international order" created by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648.
According to Ullman, the principal threat, from information freely available on the Internet and exploited by individuals like Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, and, by implication, Julian Assange (whistleblowers all), was perhaps greater even than the threat of international terrorism.
There was, he said, a "second reality" that could threaten what would be a "new world order." This reality was located in the "failed and failing states," such as Afghanistan and Zimbabwe, with Brussels and Washington "in between."
What, then, is this new world order of which he speaks? Apart from a reference to the same used by President George H. W. Bush in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ullman does not provide any specifics. If one looks elsewhere, however, there is much evidence of what it must be. But first, it must be noted that Ullman explicitly laments that "…little is likely to be done to reverse or limit the damage imposed by failed or failing governance… without an extraordinary crisis." He is clearly in the camp of those who believe that even a failing state should be saved, if necessary, through the mechanism of an extraordinary crisis (artificially contrived, as required).
Zbigniew Brzezinski is a renowned political scientist, former national security advisor to President Jimmy Carter, and co-founder, with David Rockefeller, of the secretive Trilateral Commission. In his book, published in 1970, titled Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era, he wrote: "The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen." [Emphasis added.]
In the same work, he made this Orwellian prediction: "In the technetronic society, the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities exploiting the latest techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason." So it becomes evident that reason must be defeated in the march toward this new world order.
In a speech delivered to the Council on Foreign Relations in May 2010, in Montreal, Brzezinski warned about a phenomenon thus far overlooked by the strategists; what he described as a "global political awakening," which, he said, would make things "much more difficult" even for a world power like the United States.
It appears that when he speaks, Brzezinski, like his fellow geopolitical planners, tends to speak in code. The following is a good example: Members of the G20, he said, were "lacking in internal unity with many of its members in bilateral antagonisms." His written word is, however, quite unambiguous. The brave new society that he envisaged, as early as 1970, would be more controlled because its controllers would be unrestrained by traditional values.
Brzezinski's observations on the potential menace (to individual freedom) of the technetronic era show extraordinary insight. Certainly, his prediction was far more accurate than that made almost three decades later by James Dale Davidson and William Rees-Mogg in The Sovereign Individual, in which the authors foresaw a society largely liberated from the shackles of government by the same phenomenon. If Ullman's fears should be realized, however, then Davidson and Rees-Mogg may yet be vindicated.
Ullman, one would guess, is a disciple of Zbigniew Brzezinski. The threat that he foresees to the Westphalian system of governance by non-state actors like Edward Snowden can readily be equated to Brzezinski's concern with a "political awakening." It also becomes evident why the political establishments of the United States and Britain reacted with such fury to the Snowden revelations.
For an insight to the extent of that fury, look no further than The Guardian website for an account on how that venerable publication was compelled, by what was said to be the threat of legal action, into the physical destruction of the computers containing the information disclosed to them by Snowden. A single quote will set the scene:
"In two tense meetings last June and July the cabinet secretary, Jeremy Heywood, explicitly warned The Guardian's editor, Alan Rusbridger, to return the Snowden documents. Heywood, sent personally by David Cameron, told the editor to stop publishing articles based on leaked material from American National Security Agency and GCHQ. At one point, Heywood said: 'We can do this nicely or we can go to law.' He added: 'A lot of people in government think you should be closed down'."
What The Guardian had done, along with other publications elsewhere, was to publish details of the extraordinary reach of the invasion of individual privacy under the guise of national security. What they had not done, with their disclosures, was to breach the Official Secrets Act—an offense that would have had almost immediate criminal repercussions.
The real issue is, of course, not state security, but state authority. This is also what so disturbs the militaristic sensibilities of Harlan K. Ullman: unarmed private individuals have begun to challenge the reach of a 370-year-old system of governance and the unearned privileges conferred by that system.
The idea of a compliant world population controlled by a world government, whose writ would extend across the universe of human affairs, is a perennial one. Karl Marx had such a plan, although he envisaged a more benign system of universal brotherhood in which each would care for the other, and the need for a controlling state would eventually disappear. (He had evidently not paid attention to the biblical account of the brothers Cain and Abel.) Bertrand Russell thought that universal compliance could be achieved if a central authority distributed the world's food supply, strictly according to a predetermined rationing system.
The various improvers of the human condition each have an idea that involves a period, at least, of voluntary or involuntary enslavement. The current, post-Soviet idea would create a permanent voluntary servitude, where each subject becomes a ward of the state. The mechanism is a gradual transition from socialism to an inevitable serfdom, where the state assumes the status of the godhead.
There will, as Zbigniew Brzezinski has predicted, be an elite, for the elite will always be with us, as will a vast majority of impoverished, as Bertrand Russell had foreseen. The enemy of this process, as Ullman has said, is the individual, and the diminishing prospects for its companion virtue, personal freedom, which is now best represented by the courageous and lonely campaigners, like Edward Snowden.
George Orwell, it seems, was mistaken only about the date.
After nearly ten years of study and self observation of events and how the people react to them (or do not even notice them). I have no doubt that George Orwell was not mistaken about the date, he was instructed on what to write back then, and it was published early to entertain and titillate the peoples mind, then forget it when they saw no results, so, I conclude the most valuable men of the near future are going to be the worlds best sniper patriot survivalist who will then be supplied and protected by those of us who have learned the hard way you cannot depend on governments, or any thing else when it comes to controlling the wealth of earths natural resources’. Human greed for absolute control of everything has destroyed the American dream and most others also, but they will think twice about stepping outside from then on. Those who really understand Christianity are going to realize just how important it is to have a future that lasts forever, because those who have put their faith in humanity will soon run out of gas, food, shelter, and everything else except their demonic policemen. Life for the next generations is going to be something even the foulest language of which I am well versed cannot explain, and when push comes to shove, the PTB will go with Martial Law, and the tyranny over America will accelerate exponentially. At that point, nothing remains as a potential to restore the rule of law, hence, revenge will materialize. Given the permission to do so I would joyfully slaughter, in the most painful way known, every man or woman involved in supporting and building the new world order. Their screams of agony would be remembered as long as man existed. Considering the number of despicable traitors who are involved it would be a long and joyful ending for me. Those of you who are self-righteous and horrified at my anger, should consider the hundreds of millions of dead people due to the elites actions, not to mention the millions they are going to kill, or the theft of trillions of dollars worth of resources. When your government will not protect you, do it yourself! This conclusion is based on my complete lack of confidence in the people ever getting off their ass and getting involved in saving their freedom. For every sane person who has become involved there is a million still sitting on their ass watching dancing with the stars and sports! What you do is what you get.
February 15th, 2014 by olddog
By LAWRENCE SELLIN, PHD
In his 2014 State of the Union address Barack Obama threatened to use more executive orders if Congress and the American people fail to do what he wants.
Obama, America's first grand mufti of the Constitution, intends to govern by political fatwa.
Unlike a genuine Muslim fatwa, which must be based on theological evidence, Obama fatwas originate from personal whim or political expediency, but is, nevertheless, regarded as a religious ruling, which is now accepted without objection by all Democrats, submissive Republicans and the mainstream media.
The soon-to-be-codified "Obama Law," meant to replace an archaic Constitution of dead white men, will update statutes of secular law, including crime, politics, and economics, but will also regulate personal matters such as acceptable speech, suitable income, allowable beliefs, tolerable lifespan and even appropriate caloric intake.
Jonathan Turley, law professor George Washington University and a supporter of Obama's policies, was interviewed by Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly about the "dangerous" expansion of executive power in the United States.
Turley notes: "a president who is claiming the right to basically rewrite or ignore or negate federal laws… a cult of personality for people on the left… astonished by the degree of passivity in Congress, particularly by Democrats…We are turning a blind eye to a fundamental change in our system… a system in which a single individual is allowed to rewrite legislation or ignore legislation is a system that borders on authoritarianism…I think many people will come to loathe that they remained silent during this period."
For too long the American people have been silent and inattentive. Our government has become dictatorial in gradual steps and the executive branch is now attempting to usurp supreme and absolute authority.
The Democrats, the Republicans and the media have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo from which they derive power, privilege and financial benefits. Challenging Obama in any significant way would lead to a deluge in revelations about malfeasance in the federal government. Rather than tell the truth, many in power have chosen to succumb to political expediency or self-interest and, thereby, have endorsed permanent corruption in Washington, D.C.
One solution to an irresponsible federal government and obsequious press resides within Article V of the United States Constitution.
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."
A convention of states can to be called to ensure that we are able to debate and impose a package of restraints on the misuse of power by all branches of the federal government. It is a convention initiated by the state legislatures, which cannot be blocked by Congress, for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution. It is not a constitutional convention. It cannot throw out the Constitution because its authority is derived from the Constitution.
The status quo is no longer defensible. Unless there is a significant reversal soon, it is only a matter of time that a catastrophe will be upon us, which will inevitably lead to national collapse and fragmentation. Ordinary Americans must band together and take a stand to restore the Constitution and the rule of law, to establish political and fiscal sanity and to return the government to the people.
The ruling elites will continue to oppose any reform. They should heed the warning of President John F. Kennedy:
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of "Restoring the Republic: Arguments for a Second American Revolution ". He receives email at email@example.com.
February 13th, 2014 by olddog
This article was written by Koos Jansen and originally published at In Gold We Trust
These financial industry giants lived through all the wealth cycles of the past 100 years and more. What used to be long term wealth investments evolved to the day-trading, making money activities, with a top in the year 2000. Then the financial industry morphed rapidly into the absurd High Frequency Trading. All wealth is now a spooky derivative of what it once was. Debt rules!
The US was the biggest gold reserve holder in the entire world, with 28,000 metric tons of gold in its vaults (60% of the world's total gold reserves). Most, if not all, of that gold disappeared from the UST, whilst the financial industry and the debt driven economy, expanded. First there was the London Gold Pool selling central bank gold reserves, then in 1974 Louise Auchincloss Boyer discovered that N. Rockefeller was selling UST Fort Knox gold. Three days later she fell out of her window (July 3, 1974).
Immediately afterwards a Fort Knox propaganda tour was organized. All gold fever stopped in 1980. Stock markets started their rise to the moon. Fifteen years later, the European System of Central Banks started their gold sales. Stock markets reached for the stars and suddenly The Queen made a propaganda tour through the London gold vaults (Dec, 2012). Now, China, Russia and other pro gold states (BRICS Development Bank) are accumulating the scare residues of available physical gold. The debt driven Western economy is in stagnation and the global debt crisis remains unsolved.
Where has all the physical bullion gold gone? Where is it concentrated after 45 years of distribution and very low paper gold prices? Hard to say, but the main flow of physical gold went certainly from West to East. Simply because the Western financial (pseudo) wealth industry was rising since 1980 and that made physical gold obsolete, in particular for the average Western man on the street.
The MSCI emerging market index is declining and never reached the Dow/Nasdaq/S&P heights. Physical gold has flown to these Eastern emerging (mostly surplus producing) markets whilst Western deficits are still rising. An upside down world,…or not. European banks have a $ 3.4 trillion exposure to the weak emerging markets who are suffering from brutal $ withdrawals. China's shadow banking is enormous and dangerous. The entire world has multiple fundamental reasons to embrace physical gold as a wealth asset, but only an extremely small minority keeps accumulating physical gold. The bulk of physical gold is now in the very strong hands of Western and Eastern giant dynasties and a relative very small group of gold wealth connected individuals. They all continue to accumulate, whatever the paper price of gold may discourage. They all anticipate the same looming catastrophe: pseudo-wealth destruction!
The Far & Middle East stores its wealth in physical gold and the West keeps going for financial industry pseudo-wealth and paper gold for making more (debt)money. This gold imbalance will increase strongly the more the gold price declines! Declining gold prices must encourage the further accumulation of risk assets. The Western giants don't care that Joe sixpack has no gold. They must feed their financial industry pseudo-wealth (buy stocks and debt paper). The Western giants, with trainloads of physical gold, don't care that the scarce left-overs of available physical gold flows cheaply to the East. When the pseudo-wealth comes to an end and the East will say physical gold is the real store of wealth, the Western giants with gold in their vaults, remain wealthy. Then the whole (political) economic story restarts from scratch.
The giant dynasties *are* the financial industry. They produce and control the bulk of the debt-driven pseudo-wealth. The FED is even providing liquidity for Mario's ECB (swaps). That's why their balance sheet is diverging. Euro-land is in fact still $-land.
China's present gold policies are building a base to take over the paper gold pricing from the dollar's financial regime. The valuation of physical gold must be totally delinked from currency and risk assets. China wants an orderly and open Rimini gold market with satisfactory gold market laws as to protect all wealth assets. A gold market where all underground speculative activities are strictly forbidden. They invite all foreigners to gradually participate in this gold market with emphasis on the free floating valuation of physical gold. This is in 100% contrast with the de facto dollar's gold pricing and gold policies. The dollar system doesn't want your wealth assets to be protected with gold. One day, the masses will embrace China's gold policies and leave the international $-reserve for what it never was (hard currency). The Western giants, indeed anticipated this all along with stealth accumulation of physical gold in their private vaults. They know the day of reckoning comes near.
The time has come to s&%t or get off the pot. If you have any investments at all in paper instruments or currency, convert them to cash and buy gold and silver NOW! You will never see your savings mature if their in dollars and you expect to live another year. Who do you know personally that has lost their money in hard commodities? Gold has thousands of years of history supporting its value retention and appreciation. Likewise silver, which is a much better investment for the common man with less than a $million to invest. If you are living pay-check to pay-check sell everything you can do without and buy ammo, guns, shovels, heritage seeds, and various other necessities for when the SHTF. Your dollars will wither away just like your youth, only much faster now. It’s time to get off your backside and learn how to live in a post dollar America. Barter will be the common mans money system before you are five years older.
February 12th, 2014 by olddog
By Alan Carub
America has arrived at a point at which it has never been in its 226 years of existence since the Constitution became effective in 1788. It has a President for whom that Constitution is routinely ignored in his quest to “fundamentally transform” America into a nation it has never been despite the slide into progressive policies that began early in the last century.
His namesake legacy legislation, Obamacare, is wreaking havoc on the lives of millions of Americans who have lost or will lose their healthcare plans that have been replaced with those whose cost is far higher. It is costing the nation jobs, reducing further the income of millions. The Congressional Budget Office just released a report predicting it will cost 2.3 million jobs and add $1 trillion in projected deficits.
As reported by CNSnews on February 6, “The debt of the U.S. government has increased $6.666 trillion since President Barack Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, according to the latest numbers released by the Treasury Department. It stands at $17,293,019,654, 981.61. The total debt of the nation did not exceed $6.666 trillion until 2003. The U.S. has accumulated as much debt as it did since its founding.
While in office in his first term, the U.S. credit rating was reduced for the first time in its history.
Among Obama’s Constitutional violations in 2013 were:
Delay of Obamacare’s out-of-pocket caps
Delay of Obamacare’s employer mandate
Delay of Obamacare’s insurance requirements
Exemption of Congress from Obamacare
Expansion of the employer mandate penalty through IRS regulation
Political profiling by the IRS
Recess appointments when Congress was not officially in recess
Between January 2012 and June 2013, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Obama Justice Department’s extreme positions on criminal procedure to property rights, religious liberty to immigration, security regulation to tax law, nine times.
In January CNSnews reported that 1,687,000 fewer Americans were holding fulltime jobs than held jobs in December 2007—the month the last recession began. The current number of jobless Americans is more than 92 million Americans. Simply stated, Obama has failed to restore the economy during his five years in office, having spent the first four years blaming George W. Bush for this failure.
As 2013 came to an end, Fred Barnes, writing in The Weekly Standard, noted that “On the five most important polling questions that measure a president’s success, he not only dropped significantly, but he’s now regarded negatively overall. The five yardsticks are presidential job approval, honesty, handling of the economy, strong leadership, and the public’s impression of him personally. Being under water on all five is extraordinary, if not unprecedented.”
For a growing majority of Americans, Obama has become public enemy number one.
At the heart of the disapproval of Obama is the realization that he lies about everything all the time. Nothing he says can be trusted and this is a definition of pathological dishonesty. In a recent interview before the Super Bowl with Bill O’Reilly, he lied about every issue raised. Increasingly, guests on the channel’s news shows are beginning to regularly use the word “lie” to describe what he says, where before they used euphemisms such as “untruths.”
Because the Senate is controlled by the Democratic Party, a deluge of legislation passed by the Republican-controlled House to respond to Obamacare and other aspects of the economy have been killed before any debate or vote can be taken. The Democratic Party is now wholly owned by progressives, more resembling the Communist Party USA than its former self. It engages in denouncing any critic of Obama as being a racist.
Obama’s January State of the Union address reflected his dishonesty and his agenda. It reflected the progressive belief in the “collective” rather than the value of the individual. Obama has pursued a policy of class warfare, seeking to divide Americans over the issue of economic inequality. He declared climate change—the new name for “global warming”—as “settled” science at a time when the U.S. and the rest of the world has been in a cooling cycle for the past seventeen years and can expect to remain in it for many decades to come.
At a time when many Americans cannot find work, Obama has urged an immigration amnesty that would add an estimated eleven million illegal aliens to the population along with their families which would also qualify. The only reform Americans want is stronger border security.
Reflecting barely three percent of the population, Obama reversed himself to endorse same-sex marriage, has altered the U.S. military’s policy on gays and pursued a policy to integrate women into combat units. He has forced several hundred flag officers, generals and admirals, to retire, has expanded Homeland Security’s enforcement corps, and endorsed the vastly expanded ability of the National Security Agency to secure data on every phone call Americans make or receive.
At the same time, he has sought restrictions on the Second Amendment right to own and bear arms.
It is essential to understand that no President has had the power to issue an executive order that does not have constitutional or regulatory empowerment. Failing this, any President acting in this manner is doing so as a king or despot. The Constitution was written to avoid such usurpation of power.
These and other actions have endangered the Bill of Rights on which Americans depend for justice and freedom.
I have thought that it would be unlikely the first black President will be impeached. I am beginning to think that a momentum is building toward impeachment in a Congress that no longer trusts Obama.
Obama took an oath to “faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States” which includes the enforcement of its laws. He has not only directed that laws with which he disagrees not be enforced, but he has unilaterally and unconstitutionally made changes to laws. Only Congress has that right.
The November midterm elections hold forth the opportunity to give the Republican Party the opportunity to take control of the Senate and increase members in the House. Given the trends in the polls, this appears to be the outcome. It is all that stands between Americans and a President whose contempt for their welfare and intelligence is on display every day.
© Alan Caruba, 2014
Is becoming? Hell, this bastard has been public enemy number one since the day he arrived in America. Who would have believe some nappy headed liar could have ever pulled off the things he has? The list is too long for most peoples attention span so it’s not included. This scumbag should be tarred and feathered on a pole, and shipped back to Kenya.
February 8th, 2014 by olddog
ONLY WASHINGTON KNOWS BEST
By Paul Craig Roberts
The control freaks in Washington think that only the decisions that Washington makes and imposes on other sovereign countries are democratic. No other country on earth is capable of making a democratic decision.
The world has witnessed this American self- righteousness for eons as Washington overthrows one democratic government after the other and imposes its puppet, as Washington did in Iran in 1953 when the CIA, as it now admits, and as Ervand Abrahamian proves in his book The Coup (The New Press, 2013), overthrew the elected government of Mossadeq, and more recently the elected government of Honduras and many governments in between.
Currently Washington is working overtime to overthrow the governments of Syria, Iran again, and Ukraine. Washington has also targeted Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Brazil, and in its wildest dreams the governments of Russia and China.
On January 26 Syrian government advisor Bouthaina Shaaban asked Wolf Blitzer, a propagandist for Washington and the Israel Lobby, on US TV why the US government, speaking through Secretary of Stare John Kerry, has the right to decide who is to be the government of Syria instead of the Syrian people. [Polls show that Syrian president Assad’s approval ratings exceed those of every Western leader.] Even the slimy Blitzer wasn’t slimy enough to answer, “because we are the exceptional, indispensable people.” But that’s what Washington thinks.
Washington will soon be back at work on destabilizing the government of Iran again, a habit I suppose, but for the moment Washington is focused on destabilizing Ukraine.
Ukraine has a democratically elected government, but Washington doesn’t like it because Washington didn’t pick it. The Ukraine or the western part of it is full of Washington funded NGOs whose purpose is to deliver Ukraine into the clutches of the EU where US and European banks can loot the country, as they looted, for example, Latvia, and simultaneously weaken Russia by stealing a large part of traditional Russia and converting it into US/NATO military bases against Russia.
Perhaps Putin, an athlete, is distracted by the Olympic Games in Russia. Otherwise, it is something of a puzzle why Russia hasn’t put its nuclear missiles on high alert and occupied the western Ukraine with troops in order to prevent Ukraine’s overthrow by Washington’s money. Every country has citizens that will sell the country out for money, and western Ukraine is overflowing with such traitors.
As we have seen for decades, Arabs and Muslims will sell out their people for Western money. So will western Ukrainians. The NGOs financed by Washington are committed to delivering Ukraine into Washington’s hands where Ukrainians can become American serfs and this integral part of Russia can become a staging ground for the US military.
Of all the violent protests that we have been witnessed to, the Ukrainian one is the most orchestrated.
On February 6, Zero Hedge, one of the intelligent and informed Internet sites, posted a leaked recording from the despicable Victoria Nuland, an Assistant Secretary of State in the Obama Regime. Nuland is caught discussing with the US envoy to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, Washington’s choice for who heads the next Ukrainian government.
Nuland is incensed that the European Union has not joined Washington in imposing sanctions on the Ukrainian government in order to complete Washington’s takeover of Ukraine. Nuland speaks as if she is God with the God-given right to select the government of Ukraine, which she proceeds to do.
The EU, as corrupt as it is by Washington’s money, nevertheless understands being made rich by Washington is no protection against Russian nuclear missiles. Nuland’s response to Europe’s hesitancy to risk its existence for the benefit of US hegemony is:
“Fuck the EU.”
So much for Washington’s attitude toward its captive allies and the peoples of the world.
US ‘Ukraine-gate’ Threatens to Blow Up Into Major Conflagration
By Daniel McAdams
US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt were caught in a phone conversation leaked yesterday actively plotting over which of the Ukrainian opposition figures should take which position in a post-coup Ukraine government. In the call, they were furious that the EU was not as quick to move from words to action as the US, and decided to bring in the UN to “glue” the “deal” together instead.
This is a major international scandal, and the implications of this clear evidence of direct US involvement in civil unrest in Ukraine are much more serious than most in the US and EU realize. As is to be expected, however, the US mainstream press is focused not on this evidence of extreme US recklessness and deception, but rather on whether the Russians leaked the call or not. They are ignoring the real core of the scandal to focus on salacious aspects, real or imagined.
Caught red-handed actively planning and manipulating internal politics and acting as if Ukrainian opposition politicians were literally US agents to be ordered into this position or that in a new government, the US State Department behaved as a child with his hand discovered in the cookie jar.
Witness the truly breathtaking performance by US State Department Spokesperson Jan Psaki today at a daily press briefing (and kudos to some of the journalists there who seem to be tuned in to the seriousness of this affair):
Q. Does not the fact that U.S. diplomats purportedly are discussing who should and should not be in the Ukrainian government hint at some possibility of U.S. interference here?
MS. PSAKI: Absolutely not… It’s up to the people of Ukraine, including officials from both sides, to determine the path forward. But it shouldn’t be a surprise that there are discussions about events on the ground.
Q. This is more than discussions, though. This was two top U.S. officials that are on the ground discussing a plan that they have to broker a future government and bringing officials from the U.N. to kind of seal the deal. This is more than the U.S. trying to make suggestions. This is the U.S. mid-wifeing the process.
PSAKI: Well, Elise, you’re talking about a private diplomatic conversation…. Of course these things are being discussed. It doesn’t change the fact that it’s up to the people on the ground. It is up to the people of Ukraine to determine what the path forward it.
Q: But I’m sorry, if you’re saying privately behind the scenes that you’re cooking up a deal, and then you’re saying publicly that this is up for Ukrainians to decide, those are two totally different things. I understand that diplomatic discussions are sensitive and you don’t want everything to come out, but those are two totally different — totally different positions.
The entire exchange must be watched to be believed. Even then the brazenness of the lies is unbelievable.
The US government has repeatedly denied and even ridiculed Russian suggestions that the US is playing an active role in the unrest in Ukraine. The tape erases any excuse they might have been able to field.
Here is where things get serious. Sergei Glazyev, advisor to Russian president Putin claimed today that the US was spending $20 million per week on the Ukrainian opposition, including supplying opposition with training and weapons. It is clear from recent photographs that street gangs are more organized and better equipped each day.
As Glazyev pointed out, this direct US involvement would be in violation of the Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed by both Russia and the United States in 1994. In the document, both sides agreed “to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.”
Glazyev suggested that this evidence of US violation of the Memorandum may induce Russia to also intervene in the situation.
If it was in fact Russia that acquired this recording and decided to leak it, this is likely the most direct public warning to the United States government that it is treading on a serious red line, risking a conflict of perhaps unimaginable seriousness over what is on the surface a relatively minor trade agreement between Kiev and Brussels.
The US government is far too used to giving the orders and demanding they be heeded to listen to this carefully timed, carefully crafted warning. This is not another example of Putin offering a face-saving solution to the near-disaster of a US attack on Syria this past summer.
We do not make predictions here, but let us not rule out the possibility of some very quick and significant happenings on Ukraine. February 6, 2014 may be a date for the history books.
I am on RPI, Facebook, and Twitter.
10:48 pm on February 6, 2014Email Daniel McAdams
The Best of Daniel McAdams
February 6th, 2014 by olddog
Editorial By Wendy McElroy
The libertarian publisher R.C. Hoiles insisted that the editorial page of his flagship California newspaper The Orange County Register was "a daily school room made available to its subscribers." In that schoolroom Hoiles taught what he called "voluntaryism." A November 1953 editorial, "Articles of Faith," distilled its essence: "[A] government is a good government that only does what each and every individual has the moral and ethical and just right to do." If it was not right for an individual to take money by force, then it was not right for a government to do so in the name of "taxation." Another of the "Articles" stated, "I have faith that our government would better protect every person's inalienable rights if it was supported on a voluntary basis rather than by taxes."
Perhaps no single issue better captured the libertarian spirit of Hoiles than his feisty stand on education. The "Articles" declared, "I have faith that we will be better educated by voluntary, competitive schools than by government schools." This statement must have startled conservatives who viewed the public schools as a success story. Indeed, a then-favored conservative strategy was to enter school board races. By contrast, Hoiles insisted he had no more right to vote for a school official than he did to vote for a trustee within a government-owned brothel. (Hoiles repeatedly compared public schooling to prostitution; he once declared, "A house of prostitution is voluntary, grade school is not.
Opposition to tax-supported schools became a dominant theme in Hoiles's writing; his last editorial in the Register dealt with "something-for-nothing schools that have had a great influence in conditioning pupils to believe in something for nothing." On occasion, Hoiles even found it necessary to defend the considerable amount of space school issues occupied in his paper. On October 15, 1945, he wrote, "The amount of space the Register is devoting to the junior college bond issue might cause some to think we are overestimating the importance of the issue. There is nothing more important than the principles in back of the issue."
Hoiles's Educational Background
Hoiles's evolution on education began in a "little red schoolhouse" across from his family's large farmhouse in Alliance, Ohio, where, he later explained, he learned "that the State, or a majority of citizens, had the right to use taxation to support the public school system." His school texts exposed the political "error" of the divine right of kings but "they never explained the error in the divine right of the majority.It simply substituted the divine right of the majority for the divine right of kings." Nor did his school books explain "the basic principle that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the individual; that the government had no right to do anything that each and every individual did not have the right to do. Instead, they had to teach that the government or the local school district, if the majority so willed, had a right to force a Catholic parent, or a childless person, or an old maid, or an old bachelor to help pay for government schools…."
At the same time as they legitimized taxation, however, Hoiles's teachers spoke of the Ten Commandments, including "Thou shalt not steal" and "Thou shalt not covet." He observed wryly, "[T]he government school I attended made no attempt to be consistent and teach me to recognize contradictions." The contradictions did not surprise Hoiles, who explained, "They cannot teach the single standard of rightness because they are practicing a double standard." They could not teach moral values "any more than a robber can teach honesty."
Hoiles's higher education must have also imbued him with skepticism about government education. The knowledge he valued most had been self-taught and it came directly from experience. While studying electrical engineering at the Methodist Mt. Union College (Alliance), Hoiles worked part time at his brother Frank's daily paper, the Alliance Review, and discovered what became a lifelong passion for the newspaper business. Hoiles must have wondered if his college education had been wasted. Later in life he complained of the common perception that "going through the public schools and colleges is education."
In 1932 Hoiles temporarily left the newspaper business and began to read insatiably. Even though he had shown little interest in philosophy to date, he acquired the background that allowed him to sprinkle his future writing with quotations from an amazing range of authors: from Frédéric Bastiat to Ayn Rand, from John Locke to Spinoza.
The most influential was Bastiat. In a 1955 editorial Hoiles wrote, "He was the first man who awakened me to the errors, taught in government schools and more Protestant colleges, that the state doing things that were immoral if done by an individual made these acts become moral. In other words, he was the first man that pointed out that there was only one standard of right and wrong."
In 1935, at 56, Hoiles arrived in Orange County, California where he had purchased an established newspaper. With him, Hoiles brought not only his family but also an evolved philosophy of freedom, which he aggressively applied, especially to public education.
A September 3, 1946 editorial in the Register entitled "Most Sacred of All Popular Idols, Government Education" typifies both Hoiles's style and content in approaching the issue. The editorial is clearly answering critics who argued that public education is a necessary good because it leads to a literate population.
Hoiles opened by quoting an anonymous "lover of freedom" (in truth it was his close friend and fellow libertarian publisher Leonard Read) who defined the proper role of government as a "restraining force rather than a force to compel people to do good." By "restraining," Read meant that government should prevent violence against people and property rather than advocate or impose agendas. Considering government education from this angle, the "lover of freedom" concluded "it has all the characteristics of other forms of socialism."
Some people, Hoiles continued, may see little difference between the earliest "red schoolhouses" that were voluntarily supported and the subsequent tax-funded ones. "True," he stated,
the socialism incident to the "little red school" was only a slight departure from the procedure of a few neighbors pooling their resources, voluntarily, to employ a teacher to instruct their children. But once the socialistic principle is admitted, once the idea is sanctioned of using government's powers of coercion to take the fruits of the individual's labor for the "collective good," there is no logical stopping point.
Hoiles went on to quote Isabel Paterson's The God of the Machine: "There can be no greater stretch of arbitrary power than is required to seize children from their parents, teach them whatever the authorities decree they shall be taught, and expropriate from the parents the funds to pay for the procedure." Thus, continuing the quote, "[n]eighborly, small-scale socialism in education has expanded and developed until today we are faced with the disaster of national socialism in education."
The "disaster" was partly economic. Hoiles cited statistics showing how the costs of educating one individual had increased more than ten times from 1880 to 1940, with no corresponding increase in quality.
Indeed, quality had declined — partly due to increased bureaucratization, partly to the severing of connection between a teacher's wages and his or her need to satisfy customers (the parents and children). Modern teachers needed only to satisfy the government, their new source of income.
"Government educators are becoming less and less servants of those from whom revenues are extracted or from whom their pupil raw material is conscripted," Hoiles wrote. "More and more they are becoming vested interests, concerned with their own employment and tenure. More and more they are allying themselves as a pressure group with other bureaucratic interests. More and more they are using their strategic position to turn the minds of the young towards statism and interventionism."
Attacking on yet another front, Hoiles explained the terrible impact that government teachers have on the character development of children.
I take the stand against tax-supported education because I believe … that the advantage of being able to read and write is far outweighed by the destruction of individual initiative, enterprise and responsibility brought about by government education's poison of statist psychology. Practically every youth in the land is a socialist at heart. How can he help but be unless he comes from a family that is steeped in the belief in true liberty and the dignity of man and recognizes that multiplying a robbery does not make it right?
The Context of R.C. Hoiles
It is not possible to understand the passion with which Hoiles addressed public education without establishing the historical context in which he developed. In the early twentieth century, education in America underwent a political revolution, becoming the lynch pin of the Progressive Era — a period of social reform, from the 1880s to the 1920s. A central tenet was that government needed to play a larger role in solving social problems and in promoting the "social good." "Popular," or public, education was viewed as a prerequisite and the key to reconstructing society by molding generations to come. In his watershed book, Democracy and Education (1916), John Dewey advocated using popular education as a conscious tool to remove social evil and promote social good. Slowly, the classical curricula that aimed at rigorous education — such as familiarity with Latin, a stress on history — were replaced by programs aimed at creating "good citizens."
Hoiles was outraged by his children's curriculum. In a 1961 editorial he reminisced about an incident involving his daughter Jane. After reviewing one of her school textbooks, he appeared before the directors of the Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce to protest against school books that "set forth the principles of Karl Marx." Hoiles's purpose was not to ban or censor but to assert a parent's right to guide his children's education. Nevertheless, the book was pulled. Why, then, did Hoiles's children attend public school? He told a Newsweek reporter, "There was no place else to send them."
He spelled out a particularly provocative strategy in a letter to Read. Hoiles explained, "I have repeatedly offered a member of the Board of Education in Santa Ana, who is a preacher, $100 if he would publicly attempt to harmonize tax-supported schools with quotations from Jesus.
He will not undertake it. I also made the offer to the superintendent of schools. He will not undertake it." Hoiles wondered if he should up the ante to $500 and construct the discussion as a debate, perhaps with Isabel Paterson, Rose Wilder Lane, or Read himself. Hoiles considered the offer a fail-proof maneuver. If the preacher accepted, the flaws in his argument would be exposed. If he refused, then the refusal would "cause the people of the community to wonder … whether tax-supported schools are doing what they think they are doing."
And that was his goal. To make people consider taxation as theft. To make neighbors refrain from stealing money from each other under the guise of government.
This column is excerpted from Wendy McElroy's 2013 book, The Art of Being Free.
Stop Obama’s Liberal Common Core Agenda!
Our children are each unique and precious gifts. They deserve the absolute best, especially when it comes to their education.
Fax Congress! Stop Obama’s Common Core from infecting our American education system
For the longest time, local communities have been able to develop their own school curriculum based on the individual needs of the students. This made sense because school curriculum in a farming community would naturally have to be different than urban schools’ lesson plans.
Yet, over time, the Federal government (specifically the Department of Education) has attempted to standardize the educational materials used across the entire country. This transformation of education policy has been gradual, taking place over a number of years and different Presidential administrations.
However, under President Barack Obama, the push for a national and standardized “common core” has accelerated more than ever before!
Obama’s common core policies only serve to hurt our children, and they must be stopped before it is too late! Our children’s education belongs in the hands of our parents, local officials, and states, not some liberal bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.!
We cannot afford to have schools teach our children using a cookie-cutter educational approach designed by some liberal sitting high up in his or her ivory tower!
Barack Hussein Obama has waged an all-out war on OUR right to choose the education best suited for OUR children.
Today, federal common core is at work in 45 states and the District of Columbia. Unfortunately, many states were coerced or blackmailed into adopting a standardized curriculum, often by the Obama administration threatening to withhold federal grant money if states refuse to comply.
The Obama administration has made the adoption of blanket education standards a prerequisite for receiving federal grants and waivers. Only in Obama’s America can a President bully and blackmail states into adopting a subpar education program and get away with it!
Luckily, Republicans in Congress are starting to take notice of this unjust overreach and have mobilized in opposition to the President’s heavy-handed education agenda.
A resolution was introduced yesterday by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) denouncing the President’s coercive common core agenda and moving to put an end to the standardization of American school curricula.
“This is simply not the way the Obama administration should be handling education police,” Graham said in a statement. “Our resolution affirms that education belongs in the hands of our parents, local officials and states.”
The “common core” is just another way that Washington, D.C. is trying to control all aspects of our lives. The Obama administration has moved on to trying to control the education and indoctrination of our children!
How can we just sit back and allow the liberal Obama administration to dictate what our children learn?
The “common core” was designed to expand on the Progressive principles of uniformity and equity. Progressives want to treat every child equally, all the way up to what he or she is taught in school.
This is an absolute abomination! At some point, we have to put aside this ridiculous notion that all students are the same. They are not! Each student is unique and requires a personalized educational approach in order to reach their full potential!
Every individual student has a unique set of needs and personal experiences that determine how to best educate him or her. Curriculum design is the responsibility of the teachers and parents who know the student the best. Yet today, Obama’s liberal appointees in the Department of Education are force-feeding our children with one-size-fits-all educational materials.
Barack Hussein Obama and the Department of Education are so full of themselves that they actually believe that career bureaucrats know the best way to educate your children, without ever even meeting them!
Currently, 45 states (plus the District of Columbia) have adopted a common curriculum for Math and English. These standards were supposed to be developed by each individual state; however, the Obama administration has abused its authority by blackmailing states into adopting federal standards. The progressives’ next step is to implement a nation-wide social studies and civics curriculum to “teach” your children what it means to be an American, but more importantly, what it means to be a “Citizen of the World”
This isn’t a joke. Crack open your child’s history or social studies textbook and you will see that the indoctrination of our children has already begun…
Do you know what happens if Obama’s common core agenda is allowed to succeed? You’re going to see American school children being taught a Progressive curriculum glorifying Obama and his socialist policies!
Our children deserve better than this… Our children deserve more than just a cookie cutter approach to their education…
It is time to reclaim our right to choose what is best for our children! It is time to STOP the Obama administration from strong-arming states into complying with the President’s socialistic education agenda!
Fax Congress! Stop Obama’s Common Core from infecting our American education system!
February 5th, 2014 by olddog
By Staff Report
Justice Antonin Scalia says World War II-style internment camps could happen again … Justice Antonin Scalia predicts that the Supreme Court will eventually authorize another wartime abuse of civil rights such as the internment camps for Japanese-Americans during World War II. – WashingtonExaminer
Dominant Social Theme: Whatever is happening is fully justified and in the best interests of the "American people."
Free-Market Analysis: This is a very disturbing article, but one that could surely be accurate. It is apparently based on a report from the AP that puts Scalia's comments in a more speculative – hypothetical – light, as follows:
Avi Soifer, the law school's dean, said he believed Scalia was suggesting people always have to be vigilant and that the law alone can't be trusted to provide protection.
But regardless of the imminence – or lack thereof – implied by Scalia, the implications of his remarks logically extend the trend that the "War on Terror" has already begun. Hyper-security (Homeland Security, etc.) along with travel and financial restrictions and censorship could – almost inevitably – include the potential for increased draconian measures up to and including camps of various sorts.
Also, we have a feeling – just a feeling – that Scalia is sounding a warning based on what's being discussed at high levels around him. In other words, he is not just speculating but has decided to broach a subject of considerable speculation within the military, Intel agencies, etc.
Here's part of the AP report:
Scalia was responding to a question about the court's 1944 decision in Korematsu v. United States, which upheld the convictions of Gordon Hirabayashi and Fred Korematsu for violating an order to report to an internment camp.
"Well, of course, Korematsu was wrong. And I think we have repudiated in a later case. But you are kidding yourself if you think the same thing will not happen again," Scalia told students and faculty during a lunchtime question-and-answer session.
Scalia cited a Latin expression meaning "In times of war, the laws fall silent."
"That's what was going on — the panic about the war and the invasion of the Pacific and whatnot. That's what happens. It was wrong, but I would not be surprised to see it happen again, in time of war. It's no justification but it is the reality," he said.
No doubt, the Japanese camps in the USA were part of a larger, calculated provocation designed to further polarize US citizens when it came to the war with the Japanese. In other words, the camps served as a kind of propaganda campaign.
Surely modern internment camps, if they come, will also be used for propaganda purposes. But the propaganda will be different, as the war being waged is different as well. It is a "war on terror" – with all the ambiguity that includes.
Of course, while there is ambiguity, there is also a good bit of certainty as to whom the targets are. Homeland Security on various occasions has not been shy about identifying certain groups. These include "Constitutionalists," "Preppers," "Truthers," etc. … in fact, almost anyone who has a gripe with the current direction of the US and its ever-eroding freedoms and civil rights.
Why would the US government pursue such interments? The obvious answer is that those running the government are doing so at the behest of a larger globalist crowd that wants to break US exceptionalism once and for all.
The US – like Switzerland – has a culture of freedom that is most hard to eradicate. Religious freedom, the right to bear arms and to write and believe what one chooses are elements that many millions – tens of millions – believe are embedded in US society. They are hard to eradicate.
But look to England to see what's in store. David Cameron's Tories are attacking the Internet, the media and basically making it clear that "security" trumps the "right to know."
Good news? This approach will work better in Britain than the US, where various rights are enshrined in the Constitution. England – Britain – has no written constitution and in times of social stress it is easier in some ways for British authorities to abrogate even longstanding civil rights.
Is Scalia sounding the alarm? The post-9/11 environment has been clearly one of ever-increasing government activism that has expanded civil and military police actions and Western Intel operations as well.
The NSA abuses are merely a small part of what is taking place. The FBI, CIA, MI5 and MI6, the Mossad, NATO and other facilities of Western power – including myriad other intelligence agencies that no one has heard much about – have all expanded their activities and technology. It seems the US – the West – is not being run by organized political entities anymore (if ever it was).
More and more obviously, the EU, Britain and US are run to benefit internationalist agendas that seek an ever-closer global union, both politically and economically. Military, Intel and civilian entities act as the enforcement arm for these agendas. They are as much an occupying force as they are entities of "democracy."
It is for this reason that Scalia is doubtless correct when he predicts the possibility of these camps – or at least their potential functionality. The framework is already in place, the motive is clear and the reality may not be far off if the determination to re-establish this sad chapter in US history exists …
By now everyone should be aware of how surreptitious by omission the Daily Bell can be at times, and nothing but a lack of courage has stopped them from concluding it’s not just possible, it is a fact that our elected representatives are going to send the patriots packing, and by that I mean they will pack them in like sardines. Believe it folks the powers that be are very determined to crush the spirit of freedom in America. Most of who, will meekly go without objection.
AMERICAN COURAGE, WHERE ART THOU?
February 3rd, 2014 by olddog
By Global Research
Global Research, February 01, 2014
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”
- David Rockefeller, Bilderberg, 1991
If you wish to live in a world that is “sophisticated” enough to be a world government run by an intellectual elite and global bankers, then by all means, continue to read the Washington Post, New York Times, and Time Magazine to get all your information. If, however, the idea of a select coterie of a global intellectual-financial elite running the world does not sound like the ideal society for humanity’s future, we must continue to shine the lights of publicity on the actions of powerful individuals and institutions, bringing a critical eye to their ideologies and actions.
This is the aim and objective of Global Research and the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which holds no “promises of discretion” and have not attended Bilderberg meetings. The aim is plainly stated: we are here to battle the tide of misinformation and expose the ‘New World Order.’
We have been able to develop our activities thanks to contributions from our readers. To maintain our independence, we do not seek donor support from private or public foundations. Our commitment is to make Global Research articles available to the broadest possible readership, on a noncommercial basis, without the need for a login for paid subscribers.
With a view to achieving the above objectives, while improving the form and content of our website, we have a
membership program for Global Research readers with FREE GIFTS for our members!
Start the new year with an Annual Membership from Global Research!
What You Will Get with your Global Research Annual Membership:
All new Annual Members (Standard AND Student/Senior/Low Income) as well as all Annual Membership renewals will receive 2 FREE BOOKS! (See details below)
Your Annual Membership entitles you to receive the following:
The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century
Michel Chossudovsky and Andrew Gavin Marshall (Editors)
as well as a FREE COPY of the latest book from Global Research (Print Format for standard Annual Membership /PDF Format for Annual Student/Senior/Low Income Membership):
Towards a World War Three Scenario: The Danger of Nuclear War
by Michel Chossudovsky
(*Offer valid for annual memberships only. Monthly memberships do not qualify for this offer. For information on
Monthly Memberships, please click here.)
These books from Global Research offer information on a broad range of issues, from the history of central banking, to the national security state, think tanks, financial warfare, debt slavery, war, and empire.
The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century
(FREE with Annual Membership!)
Michel Chossudovsky and Andrew Gavin Marshall (Editors)
In all major regions of the world, the economic recession is deep-seated, resulting in mass unemployment, the collapse of state social programs and the impoverishment of millions of people. The meltdown of financial markets was the result of institutionalized fraud and financial manipulation. The economic crisis is accompanied by a worldwide process of militarization, a “war without borders” led by the U.S. and its NATO allies.
This book takes the reader through the corridors of the Federal Reserve, into the plush corporate boardrooms on Wall Street where far-reaching financial transactions are routinely undertaken.
Each of the authors in this timely collection digs beneath the gilded surface to reveal a complex web of deceit and media distortion which serves to conceal the workings of the global economic system and its devastating impacts on people’s lives.
NEW E-BOOK! Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War
(FREE with Annual Membership!)
by Michel Chossudovsky
The war on Libya is an integral part of the broader military agenda in the Middle East and Central Asia which until recently consisted of three distinct areas of conflict : Afghanistan and Pakistan (the AfPak War), Iraq, Palestine. A fourth war theater has opened up in North Africa, which raises the issue of escalation over a vast geographical area. These four war theaters are interrelated. They are part of a broader region of conflict, which extends from North Africa and the Middle East, engulfing a large part of the Mediterranean basin, to China’s Western frontier with Afghanistan, and Northern Pakistan.
The “Global War on Terrorism” requires going after the terrorists, using advanced weapons systems. US foreign policy upholds a pre-emptive religious-like crusade against evil, which serves to obscure the real objectives of military action. In the inner consciousness of Americans, the attacks of September 11, 2001 justify acts of war and conquest against evil-doers. The Global War on Terrorism is presented as a “clash of civilizations”, a war between competing values and religions, when in reality it is an outright war of conquest, guided by strategic and economic objectives. The lies behind 9/11 are known and documented. The American people’s acceptance of this crusade against evil is not based on any rational understanding or analysis of the facts. “The American inquisition” purports to extend Washington’s sphere of influence. Military intervention is justified as part of an international campaign against “Islamic terrorists”. Its ultimate intention, which is never mentioned in press reports, is territorial conquest and control over strategic resources. Ironically, under the Global War on Terrorism, these plans of conquest are instrumented by covertly supporting Islamic paramilitary armies, which are then used to destabilize non-compliant governments and impose Western standards of “governance” and “democracy”.
While Iran remains on the Pentagon’s drawing board, a fundamental shift in the sequencing of military operations has occurred. The US-NATO-Israel alliance realizes that Iran has significant capabilities to respond and retaliate. With the onset of the US-NATO led war in North Africa, Washington and its allies have chosen to wage war on countries with lesser military capabilities. This factor in itself has been crucial in the decision by the US and its allies to put “the Iran operation” on hold, while launching a “humanitarian war” on Libya.
So begin your Annual Membership today and receive
TWO FREE BOOKS from Global Research!
Help support us and let us continue to “shine the lights of publicity” on the intellectual elite and world bankers who destroy our economies, control our resources, take our liberties, make our wars, impoverish us and oppress us, and plunder all the world around us.
The Global Research Team
Start your Annual Membership online, by mail, or by faxing in your payment!
Full details can be found by following this link to our MEMBERSHIP PAGE
Copyright © 2014 Global Research
February 1st, 2014 by olddog
By Jon Rappoport
Apparently, the President had ingested some kind of weird drug, because when he stepped to the podium he didn’t look at the teleprompter. He just started talking.
“…like every other recent President, when I take to this platform I’m expected to tell a certain number of lies dressed up as the truth. And believe me, folks, I had a few whoppers ready to go.
“But now I feel like doing something else. I’m not going to delve into the many scandals of my administration, because examining them and taking them apart and exposing the lies would keep us here all night and into tomorrow.
“Instead, I just want to explain my overarching agenda. It’s the same agenda every modern President has fronted for. I’m not really doing anything new. That’s a myth.
“You see, in order to become President in the first place, I had to sign on to the scheme to debase, throttle, and weaken this country. I have my methods. Every President has his own.
“Weakening America is part and parcel of Globalism. Ultimately, America will not lead the way into what has been called the New World Order. International heavy hitters, bankers, and corporations will carry that ball. America will go along, with its population of sleeping masses.
“So-called Pax Americanus, or imperial American empire, has been shelved, in favor of a much larger operation.
“My basic job is allowing all this to happen, so we end up with a global management system, in which the individual is enmeshed.
“With some degree of accuracy, you could say that everything I’ve been doing is a smokescreen to obscure the march of Globalism.
“We politicians view humans at large as dangerous and badly programmed biological machines. Until new programming can be inserted universally, we keep things in check. We hold the fort.
“For the next two years, I’ll continue clamping down on rights and freedoms. I’ll support the Surveillance State. I’ll take away guns. I’ll step up psychiatric intervention. I’ll increase debt. I’ll keep unemployment high. I’ll probably launch a few more military interventions. Expect more mass shootings, which are covert actions, with appointed patsies to take the fall.
“I’ll allow the expanded militarization of local police forces. I’ll intercede, wherever possible, to stop individuals from living off the grid. I’ll try to mangle the spirit of self-sufficiency in whatever form it occurs.
“I’ll assist mega-corporations. I’ll keep as many doors open for Monsanto as I can.
“You get my drift. It’s business as usual. In my case, I’ll try to up the ante and intensify the collapse of America.
“Did someone put something in my cigarette or coffee? I’m telling the truth. It feels strange, very strange.
“Anyway, here’s to One World under one authority. It’s the only solution to our problems. Trust me, I wouldn’t mislead you. Give up, give in, take the ride. It’s not so bad. Resistance is a fool’s errand. The people who are running things are out to destroy independence. Let them. By the time they’re finished, you’ll see that ‘equality’ isn’t so bad.
“One final random thought. Agents of the US government killed Martin Luther King. In case you didn’t know that. Good night and good luck.”
January 26th, 2014 by olddog
January 26, 2014
"The planter, the farmer, the mechanic, and the laborer… form the great body of the people of the United States, they are the bone and sinew of the country. Men who love liberty and desire nothing but equal rights and equal laws." President Andrew Jackson
The first of the job and sovereignty killing treaties so innocently called an agreement was NAFTA. Official title: North American Free Trade Agreement. In reality: No American Factories Taking Applications. That unconstitutional tool of the global elite was pushed through by globalist Newt Gingrich with enormous help from Rush Limbaugh. Marxist Bill Clinton signed it into "law" in December 1993. Then began the massive destruction of the three job sectors that made America the most prosperous nation on the face of this earth: manufacturing, industrial and agriculture.
A bill was introduced in 2011 to finally get us out. It got zero attention from the old media. Forget FOX. Too many Americans pay little to no attention to bills sitting in the biggest whore house on the planet- except for hot button issues like abortion; it went no where. There were too few of us to make it happen.
H.R. 29: To provide for the withdrawal of the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement
“NAFTA has done way too much damage, and we need to repeal it. NAFTA has cost too many jobs, eroded our industrial base and decimated towns and communities,” he said in a statement. “Enough is enough – we need to focus on creating jobs right here in the United States – not in foreign countries.”
"The bill currently has just 10 co-sponsors: Democratic Reps. Joe Baca, Lynn Woolsey and Bob Filner of California; Michael Capuano (MA), Peter DeFazio (OR), Marcy Kaptur (OH), Larry Kissell (NC) and Michael Michaud (ME). Two Republicans are also backing the legislation: Texas’ Ron Paul and North Carolina’s Walter Jones. The bill has been referred to the House Ways and Means Committee, but no action has been taken on it since that time.
"Prior to the implementation of NAFTA, the U.S. held a small trade surplus with Mexico of approximately $10 million. By 2007, that surplus had turned into an astounding $91 billion trade deficit. With Canada and Mexico combined, the U.S. has taken a $24 billion trade deficit prior to NAFTA and turned it into a $190 billion deficit – a 691 percent increase.
"NAFTA was also supposed to usher in a new age of prosperity among the American people as thousands upon thousands of good-paying jobs were to be created through the increase in trade surplus that never quite came to fruition. As you can imagine, just the opposite happened. Each and every year more and more jobs are outsourced to Mexico where labor is incredibly cheap and environmental concerns are a mere afterthought. The raft of jobs outsourced to Mexico forced American workers into direct competition with one another and drove down wages for all.
"Now Americans are forced to compete, not only with one another, but also with Mexican workers who are willing to work for much less than the average American. In the U.S., the average factory worker makes roughly $18 per hour while his Mexican counterpart earns just $3 per hour. This has encouraged a “race to the bottom” in which American companies are frequently relocating production facilities across the border. Iconic American companies such as Coca Cola, Ford, RCA, General Motors, General Electric and Nokia have all opened up assembly plants in Mexico. In fact, GE employs 30,000 Mexicans in 35 factories in the country.
"This race to the bottom has had a devastating effect on America’s manufacturing base. Pre-NAFTA, the U.S. had 16.8 million people employed in the manufacturing field. By 2007, that number was down to just 13.9 million. That accounts for over 20 percent of America’s manufacturing jobs over the past 14 years. Those good-paying manufacturing jobs have been replaced by low-paying service sector jobs with little or no benefits."
Twenty Years of NAFTA Sucking Sound
NAFTA: 20 Years of Regret for Mexico
So many of us across this country warned what would happen, who and what was behind it:
"What Congress will have before it is not a conventional trade agreement but the architecture of a new international system…a first step toward a new world order." July 18, 1993, CFR/Trilateralist Henry Kissinger, LA Times on NAFTA. There's no question in my mind Kissinger was a Soviet spy; a dirty traitor. Yes, communists were elected to Congress; see The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitors.
I would like you to take a look at this map published in the Denver [Com]Post, August 30, 1992: A New North America. While that "agreement" was being pushed by the hands that own and direct the WH and the Outlaw Congress, many of us tried to warn, but few paid any attention. It is a blue print to break up our country in favor of regions comprising a world government. Right there for the whole country to see but who did not see because NAFTA was being sold as a way to bring "cheap" goods to America.
Twenty years ago. Twenty year olds today were infants when it was passed. Thirty year olds were age 10. I feel very few to this day have any understanding about just how momentous it was and what it would do to this country. I knew because I was running for Congress at the time and did a crash course on trade and tariffs. I also read an outstanding book, The Pooring of America: Competition & The Myth of Free Trade by Dr. Ravi Batra. Today, those adults don't have a clue; their grand parents and parents driven out of long time, secure, good paying jobs, losing everything and forced into big urban cities infested with crime and violence looking for new jobs.
My opponent, incumbent Wally the Waffle Herger, wrote a letter to the Farm Bureau in that district two weeks before the vote outlining how bad NAFTA would be for farmers and ranchers. Two weeks later he voted for it anyway. The people in that district went on to reelect him after he voted to destroy their livelihoods; I've already written many times about how vote fraud won Wally reelection, so I won't waste time here. The Waffle spent most of his life on the public dime, first as a school board honcho in 1976, then on to the California State Legislature for eight years and then the Outlaw Congress for 26 years. He's now retired with full pension benefits paid for by the sweat of your labor for the rest of his life. (With service of 20-25 years, a Member of Congress could retire with up to 80 percent of his or her final salary replaced.) The Waffle just made the 25 year mark.
Next came the grand daddy: The WTO/GATT. The World Trade Organization/ General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The original one was signed in 1947. The big and final one signed into "law" in Marrakesh in 1994, by Marxist Bill Clinton. Full page ad, NY Times, April 15, 1994:1944. Bretton Woods: The IMF and the World Bank. 1945. San Francisco: The United Nations. 1994, Marrakech: The World Trade Organization. History knows where it's going. The final act of the Uruguay Round….to the WTO, the third pillar of the New World Order, along with the UN and the IMF."
We the people are forced to fund our own destruction by thugs in the IRS courtesy of your incumbent and mine. The Outlaw Congress has been unconstitutionally stealing the fruits of our labor in dues for the communist UN and another cabal of evil thieves, the IMF, International Monetary Fund longer than I've been alive. No where in Art. 1, Sec. 8, does it give the U.S. Congress any authority to steal from us to give to those private organizations out to destroy our sovereignty. Yet, do the people demand candidates running for Congress, challengers or incumbents, get us out of those destructive entities draining the life blood of America? Oh, a few of us "extremists".
During the hearings on that monster GATT/WTO, French financier, the late Sir James Goldsmith, testified in front of Ernest Hollings committee. He demonstrated that GATT would gut the American textile market. The following are some quotes from the Washington Times, Dec. 6, 1993, which accurately reflect Sir Goldsmith's statements during the hearings:
"Global free trade will force the poor of the rich countries to subsidize the rich in poor countries. What GATT means is that our national wealth, accumulated over centuries, will be transferred from a developed country like Britain to developing countries like Communist China, now building its first oceangoing navy in 500 years. China, with its 1.2 billion people, three Indochinese states with 900 million, the former Soviet republics with some 300 million, and many more can supply skilled labor for a fraction of Western costs. Five dollars in Communist China is the equivalent of a $100 wage in Europe.
"It is quite amazing that GATT is sowing the seeds for global social upheaval and that it is not even the subject of debate in America … If the masses understood the truth about GATT, there would be blood in the streets of many capitals. A healthy national economy has to produce a large part of its own needs. It cannot simply import what it needs and use its labor force to provide services for other countries. We have to rethink from top to bottom why we have elevated global free trade to the status of sacred cow, or moral dogma. It is a fatally flawed concept that will impoverish and destabilize the industrialized world while cruelly ravaging the Third World."
There were riots in a few locations around the country over the WTO; up to 100,000 people in Seattle. Huge ones in Europe. The late Sir Goldsmith told America what would happen and it did on a massive scale.
In 2000, the Outlaw Congress had the chance to get us out of GATT/WTO. The effort was killed by John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi. Since the impostor president has been squatting in the White House, John Boehner has given Barry Soetoro aka Obama every damn "free" trade treaty or "agreement" he's pushed for; sleeping with America's enemy, Johnny boy. Do have another glass of the red wine you're so fond of.
On June 9, 2005, the House voted 338-86 to reject a motion to withdraw congressional approval of the 1994 agreement establishing the WTO and governing body, GATT. George Bush, Jr., following in his father's steps to destroy our sovereignty and American jobs in favor of a new world order signed another job killing treaty: CAFTA – the Central America Free Trade Agreement. While the globalists in the Outlaw Congress were working to get CAFTA shoved down our throats, I was driving around the country doing my work. At every hotel and restaurant I ask clerks, waiters/waitresses: What do you think of the new "free" trade treaty being proposed, CAFTA? Not one American knew what I was talking about. Not a single working American knew anything about it; all I got is blank stares.
Once NAFTA got going, corporations that used to support American workers took MILLIONS of good paying, steady career jobs – particularly the steel and textile industry – and shipped them to Mexico. Suddenly, THOUSANDS of factories closed. Cities and towns that flourished for more than a century providing jobs for your grand parents generation they stayed in for their entire lives until retirement became little more than ghost towns. I know because I traveled extensively through Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana. I saw with my own eyes what NAFTA did; it has been a complete and total disaster, as has our participation in the WTO.
One book that stands out on this issue is America's Projectionist Takeoff 1815- 1914: The Neglected American School of Political Economy by Michael Hudson. I invite you to read the comments about Hudson's book; it really is a must read. What made us a power house has been destroyed since 1994 and yet, every two years the American people who have suffered so badly because of all those treaties continue to reelect the same scum bags back to the House of Representatives and Senate who have taken us to poverty with more in the works.
Patrick Buchanan explains it perfectly:
"It seems that, despite the academic consensus that free trade is a win-win for all, free trade is not free. Great nations that have risen to global power by protecting their manufacturing, like Britain in the early 19th century, have begun their relative decline when they embraced free trade. Between 1870 and 1914, projectionist America and Germany both shoved Britain aside.
"Since Y2K, China, which protects its industrial base by keeping its currency artificially cheap, has surged past Italy, Britain, France, Germany and Japan to become the world's second largest economy. And they are gaining steadily on us. Free trade appears to be the policy of fading nations.
"Perhaps it is time for a profit and loss statement of its costs and benefits. Undeniably, free trade has been a bonanza for the top 1 percent and many among our top 10 percent. As U.S. manufacturers shut down scores of thousands of U.S. factories to finance new plants in Asia, their production costs plummeted. Wages and benefits for Asians were, and are still, but a fraction of those of American workers.
"Health, safety and environmental standards were in some cases almost nonexistent. The eight-story garment factory in Bangladesh that collapsed in April, killing 1,100 workers, mostly women, and injuring another 2,500, would never have passed a U.S. building inspection.
"After having shifted production overseas and dramatically lowered costs, U.S. transnational’s saw a surge in profits. These were used to push corporate salaries into the stratosphere, increase dividends to shareholders, and keep the Washington lobbyists working the Hill day and night for fast track and free trade. And the lifestyle of our corporate elites changed. Where their fathers walked sooty factory floors in smokestack towns in World War II, these masters of the universe fly Gulfstream Vs to Davos and Dubai to dine with titled Europeans, Saudi princes and Chinese billionaires.
"These are America's winners from free trade. The losers? Middle Americans. The average U.S. family has not seen a rise in real wages in 40 years. This is directly traceable to the loss of more than one-third of all U.S. manufacturing jobs. And that loss, that deindustrialization of America, is directly tied to the $10 trillion in trade deficits since Bush I.
"Writers who celebrate how U.S. imports have risen in this month or that year almost never mention the trade deficit for this month or that year. Perhaps that is because the United States has not run a trade surplus in four decades, whereas, in the first 70 years of the 20th century, we never ran a trade deficit. Trade surpluses add to GDP; trade deficits subtract from GDP.
"And when in a company town the company closes the factory, the town often dies. And all the little satellite businesses — bars, diners, food stores, pharmacies — that rose around the factory, they die, too. "The tombstones of countless dead towns across America should read: Killed by Free Trade. Tenured economists on college campuses call this "creative destruction." End of excerpt.
If you think it doesn't or won't affect you, it has and will continue through trickle down economics, one of the few things I agreed with Reagan. I live in a small town in W. Texas. Last week three businesses that were here when I arrived in June 2006, closed their doors. The Permian Basin where I live is oil country. Good wages and fairly low unemployment. But, something is making people hold on to their money.
Now comes two more threats, which will bring even more job losses. More jobs for people in foreign countries while Americans live on food stamps and unemployment for years. More loss of OUR sovereignty.
Don't listen to those promoting the TPP & Transatlantic Free Trade Area. While I am not against corporations (I think Hobby Lobby is a fine example of good, God fearing Americans running a highly successful private sector business), I am against what they've become, all for more money. Greed long ago took over love of country and decency.
Yes, I do fully understand the reality of what "free" trade did. It pitted American workers at double digit dollars per hour against workers in foreign countries making the equivalent of US $5.00 a day. Yes, I fully understand the problems all those "free" trade treaties created for companies and corporations here in America. Instead of throwing the rats out of the Outlaw Congress who caused this collapse of our job market, mega corporations put big money into their coffers to get them reelected. Uninformed Americans followed in the true sense of the herding technique because of blind loyalty to their party by reelecting the same incumbents whose votes contributed to killing our most important job markets. In reality, American workers fired themselves by supporting the same incumbents who destroyed their jobs.
But, it isn't just the "free" trade and cheap overseas wages; it's also about the purchasing power of the dollar, fiat currency and the "Federal" Reserve. Until one understands the devastation caused by our debauched currency along with heavy, progressive taxation, they won't get the full picture.
The TPP & TAFTA must be stopped because it is a job and sovereignty killing tool for world government advocates.
The Facts – What is TPP? - Very specific as to what the TPP is and how it will further destroy us.
Expose the TPP – a good overview
Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA):
"Some call it the Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) and others call it the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). They're both names for the same thing, a dangerous proposal that will have disastrous effects on the economy, health, safety, freedom, and sovereignty of the United States and her citizens.
"Closed-door meetings started earlier this year on the proposed TAFTA/TTIP. Corporate interests in the United States and Europe have been pushing for an agreement for decades, but only now is it beginning to materialize. These moneyed interests now have more power than ever over our politicians and are using it to their advantage. These corporations are the ones really writing this agreement. Just like with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), there are over 600 corporate “advisers” with access to the text of the agreement, while even our elected congressional representatives cannot read the entire agreement. These corporations will be fine tuning the agreements to maximize their profits, with no regard to what this will do to the United States.
"Unlike many of the previous agreements the United States has signed onto, TAFTA/TTIP is not an agreement with a low-wage, low-regulation country. Wages in the EU are comparable to those in the United States, and European labor and environmental standards are often more stringent than those we have here. We are unlikely to see this agreement have the same direct negative impact on U.S. jobs that previous agreements have had, with scores of U.S. jobs sent overseas due to agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Of the 29 chapters in TAFTA/TTIP, only 5 directly deal with trade.
"So if this agreement is not about trade, what is it about? Inevitably this will be about gutting the ability of our government to do its job. This agreement is likely to further entrench the power of corporations to shape the laws of sovereign nations to fit their needs. If this agreement is passed we will be giving up more of our sovereignty, not to Europe, but to corporations who care only about their bottom lines." More at the link.
The TPP and TAFTA are poison. Both are being negotiated behind closed doors. Not even the Outlaw Congress is allowed to see the text in those "agreements":
"U.S. Senator Ron Wyden has introduced S. 3225, legislation that would require the Office of the United States Trade Representative to disclose its TPP documents to all members of Congress. Wyden asserted. “The majority of Congress is being kept in the dark as to the substance of the TPP negotiations, while representatives of U.S. corporations — like Halliburton, Chevron, PHRMA, Comcast, and the Motion Picture Association of America — are being consulted and made privy to details of the agreement.”
"A Corporate Trojan Horse": Obama Pushes Secretive TPP Trade Pact, Would Rewrite Swath of U.S. Laws
"As the federal government shutdown continues, Secretary of State John Kerry heads to Asia for secret talks on a sweeping new trade deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The TPP is often referred to by critics as "NAFTA on steroids," and would establish a free trade zone that would stretch from Vietnam to Chile, encompassing 800 million people — about a third of world trade and nearly 40 percent of the global economy. While the text of the treaty has been largely negotiated behind closed doors and, until June, kept secret from Congress, more than 600 corporate advisers reportedly have access to the measure, including employees of Halliburton and Monsanto.
"This is not mainly about trade," says Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. "It is a corporate Trojan horse. The agreement has 29 chapters, and only five of them have to do with trade. The other 24 chapters either handcuff our domestic governments, limiting food safety, environmental standards, financial regulation, energy and climate policy, or establishing new powers for corporations."
Only one member of the Outlaw Congress read all 28,000 pages of the WTO/GATT nightmare, former Senator Hank Brown [R-UT] who refused to vote for it. He left after one term. Not one member of the Outlaw Congress including favorites like Steve King [R-Iowa], Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio nd Mike Lee [R-UT] read the $1.1 TRILLION borrowed dollars, another more debt budget agreement pushed through a few weeks ago. Stealing us blind for hundreds of billions of unconstitutional rape: "All told, the bill would provide $1.012 trillion to the Pentagon and other federal agencies. An additional $92 billion would be set aside for overseas operations, including military activity in Afghanistan and assistance for the growing flow of refugees fleeing the war in Syria. "A bill they didn't even bother to read.
Now, we have two more "agreements" that will tighten the noose around our necks and the very body who has the authority to pass such agreements aren't even allowed to know what's in them except what has been leaked. Who is leading the pack in the GOP to sell us out, again? GOP set to fast-track 'New World Order' pact.
NEW YORK – "Republicans in the House are preparing to follow the lead of the White House and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to rubber-stamp the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, the most sweeping free-trade agreement since NAFTA.
"The White House seeks to pass it with a simple majority vote, without so much as introducing a single amendment to modify the language of the agreement it has negotiated behind closed doors. On Jan. 9, 2013, in a little-noticed press release, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., together with ranking member Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich, announced they were introducing “fast track” trade promotion authority legislation as a prelude to bringing up the TPP for expected passage in the near future.
"With House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, already deciding to vote with Senate Democrats to grant fast track authority for congressional consideration of the TPP, the only remaining opposition to the bill seems to be coming from House Democrats."
That sleeze ball does have challengers against him in the upcoming primary. But, the party machine will throw all their money and support to reelect Johnny. Because, after all, John Boehner serves his global masters, not the people of his district for the past 23 years. However, there is a tea party candidate who could beat him IF the people in his district get out the vote to toss Boehner out on his butt. If Boehner allegedly wins, the alleged loser closest to his vote total must demand a full hand recount and cross check the voting rolls. Otherwise, Boehner will walk right back to Congress to continue defecating on the Constitutution and selling us out to the global elite.
Please, take the time today to write a short letter – no email – and send it to the district office (where the votes are; DC is where the lobbyists operate) for your U.S. House member and Senator and tell them: NO on the TPP and TAFTA. Remind them the primaries are looming. Stop killing more jobs and destroying our sovereignty.
Also, if you haven't written a snail mail letter to the district office to the thief who represents you in the U.S. House, please do it. NO amnesty in any form for liars, cheats and thieves; illegal aliens. Deport not reward.. This is urgent; see bullet points at the bottom of my recent column.
Please continue buying Made in America; see huge list here. We can create a job boom simply by purchasing Made in the USA. Support American workers because those paychecks benefit local businesses. I am not against fair trade, but prior to NAFTA 97% of all shoes were made here by American workers. Today it's less than 3%; all those good paying, permanent full time jobs gone to COMMUNIST China and countries like Brazil. Our textile industry the same; destroyed. Our steel industry the same; destroyed. Nearly 10 MILLION full time career long jobs gone. We can turn this around and slowly are, but it takes being committed to saving America, not supporting anti-American corporations who don't give a tinker's damn about you and your family, just your money.
Do you have time today or even tomorrow night to save your country? To write a couple of snail mail letters? If we do nothing, nothing gets done. Those bandits in the Outlaw Congress need to have thousands, tens of thousands of hard copy letters flooding their district offices. Please share this information with your social networking sites and through the grapevine, if you will. Networking works.
Master list of Made in USA companies who want your business
1- Americans Don't Want Good Paying Jobs
2- Secret Obama-hatched trade deals TPP and TAFTA
would allow Monsanto to outlaw GMO labeling worldwide
3- Congress refuses to bring home millions of jobs
4- Connecting The Americas 2022
Click here to visit NewsWithViews.com home page.
© 2014 – NewsWithViews.com and Devvy – All Rights Reserve
January 25th, 2014 by olddog
By BOB UNRUH
Some of the nation’s most respected legal teams are asking the Supreme Court to take up a challenge to the indefinite-detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act, charging the law has created the framework for a police state.
The controversial provision authorizes the military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap, detain without trial and hold indefinitely American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States.”
Journalist Chris Hedges, who is suing the government over a controversial provision in the National Defense Authorization Act, is seen here addressing a crowd in New York's Zuccotti Park.
Journalist Chris Hedges is among the plaintiffs charging the law could be used to target journalists who report on terror-related issues.
A friend-of-the-court brief submitted in the case states: “The central question now before this court is whether the federal judiciary will stand idly by while Congress and the president establish the legal framework for the establishment of a police state and the subjugation of the American citizenry through the threat of indefinite military arrest and detention, without the right to counsel, the right to confront one’s accusers, or the right to trial.”
The bried was submitted to the Supreme Court by attorneys with the U.S. Justice Foundation of Ramona, Calif., Friedman Harfenist Kraut & Perlstein of Lake Success, N.Y., and William J. Olson, P.C. of Vienna, Va.
The attorneys are Michael Connelly, Steven J. Harfenist, William J. Olson, Herbert W. Titus, John S. Miles, Jeremiah L. Morgan and Robert J. Olson.
They are adding their voices to the chorus asking the Supreme Court to overturn the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said the plaintiffs didn’t have standing to challenge the law adopted by Congress.
The brief is on behalf of U.S. Rep. Steve Stockman, Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall, Virginia Sen. Dick Black, the U.S. Justice Foundation, Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Center for Media & Democracy, Downsize DC Foundation, Downsize DC.org, Free Speech Defense & Education Fund, Free Speech Coalition, Western Journalism Center, The Lincoln Institute, Institute on the Constitution, Abraham Lincoln Foundation and Conservative Legal Defense & Education Fund.
The 2014 NDAA was fast-tracked through the U.S. Senate, with no time for discussion or amendments, while most Americans were distracted by the scandal surrounding A&E’s troubles with “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson.
Eighty-five of 100 senators voted in favor of the new version of the NDAA, which had already been quietly passed by the House of Representatives.
Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, and others filed a lawsuit in 2012 against the Obama administration to challenge the legality of an earlier version of the NDAA.
It’s Section 1021 of the 2012 NDAA, and its successors, that drew a lawsuit by Hedges, Daniel Ellsberg, Jennifer Bolen, Noam Chomsky, Alex O’Brien, Kai Warg All, Brigitta Jonsottir and the group U.S. Day of Rage. Many of the plaintiffs are authors or reporters who stated that the threat of indefinite detention by the U.S. military already had altered their activities.
“It’s clearly unconstitutional,” Hedges says of the bill. “It is a huge and egregious assault against our democracy. It overturns over 200 years of law, which has kept the military out of domestic policing.”
Hedges is a former foreign correspondent for the New York Times and was part of a team of reporters awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for the paper’s coverage of global terrorism.
The friend-of-the-court brief warns the precedent “leaves American citizens vulnerable to arrest and detention, without the protection of the Bill of Rights, under either the plaintiff’s or the government’s theory of the case.
“The judiciary must not await subsequent litigation to resolve this issue, as the nature of military detention is that American citizens then would have no adequate legal remedy,” the brief explains.
Video mania: The instruction manual on how to restore America to what it once was: “Taking America Back” on DVD. This package also includes the “Tea Party at Sea” DVD.
Section 1021 allows the detention of anyone, including American citizens, by the military, if the president considers that person to have help with terror. It’s different from the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, which was adopted immediately after the 9/11 terror attacks, because while that law allows detention, there must be something linking them to the 9/11 attacks.
“Section 1021 authorizes detention, potentially forever, and even rendition of American citizens to foreign nations,” the brief points out. “If this court refuses to hear the Hedges challenge, it will leave American citizens subject to unconstitutional military arrest and detention.
“If this court does not grant the petition, there is no reason to believe the U.S. presidents would cease to assert ‘the right to place certain individuals [including American citizens] in military detention, without trial.’ There would continue to be no statutory constraint on an arrest being authorized by a military officer of unspecified rank. There would be no protection provided by the requirement of a grand jury indictment. There would be no requirement of an arrest arrant issued by an Article II judge supported by a sworn affidavit showing probable cause of the commission of a specific crime. Neither would there be any protection against use of compelled testimony, or against an violation of due process of law. There would be no civilian proceedings whatsoever against the person detained. Indeed, there is no requirement that the individual being detained has committed any federal crime, and military detentions could be used to circumvent the protections afforded American citizens by the treason clause of the U.S. Constitution.”
It describes a scary scenario.
“After the string of black Suburbans pulls away, it is difficult to believe that the military would provide relatives or lawyers with any information whatsoever as to where the person being detained was being held.”
After all, it explains, Congress specifically expressed its desire for the detention provision to apply to American citizens even on American soil by rejecting multiple amendments that would have exempted them.
And Obama, also, affirmed the detention authority, stating, “I want to clarify that my administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens … My administration will interpret Section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.”
Simply stating that means it could be interpreted in a contrary manner.
At the trial court level, U.S. District Judge Katherine B. Forrest issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order that struck the provision as unconstitutional.
Multiple states have passed state laws banning its enforcement inside those states. Herb Titus, a constitutional expert, previously told WND Forrest’s ruling underscored “the arrogance of the current regime, in that they will not answer questions that they ought to answer to a judge because they don’t think they have to.”
The judge explained that the plaintiffs alleged paragraph 1021 is “constitutionally infirm, violating both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the 1st Amendment as well due process rights guaranteed by the 5th Amendment.”
She noted the government “did not call any witnesses, submit any documentary evidence or file any declarations.”
“It must be said that it would have been a rather simple matter for the government to have stated that as to these plaintiffs and the conduct as to which they would testify, that [paragraph] 1021 did not and would not apply, if indeed it did or would not,” she wrote.
Instead, the administration only responded with, “I’m not authorized to make specific representations regarding specific people.”
“The court’s attempt to avoid having to deal with the constitutional aspects of the challenge was by providing the government with prompt notice in the form of declarations and depositions of the … conduct in which plaintiffs are involved and which they claim places them in fear of military detention,” she wrote. “To put it bluntly, to eliminate these plaintiffs’ standing simply by representing that their conduct does not fall within the scope of 1021 would have been simple. The government chose not to do so – thereby ensuring standing and requiring this court to reach the merits of the instant motion.
“Plaintiffs have stated a more than plausible claim that the statute inappropriately encroaches on their rights under the 1st Amendment,” she wrote.
Experts have expressed concern that even a journalist who has interviewed a member of a terror group may be considered to have rendered aid to that group.
The government appealed the trial judge’s ruling to the 2nd Circuit, which abruptly ruled that the plaintiffs had no right to challenge the law.
In the following interview, Hedges, early in the case, described what he sees developing:
January 24th, 2014 by olddog
By Brandon Smith VIVA LA REVOLUTION
There is one rule to citizen defiance that, in my opinion, surpasses all others in strategic importance; and it is a rule that I have tried to drive home for many years. I would call it the “non-participation principle” and would summarize it as follows:
When facing a corrupt system, provide for yourself and your community those necessities that the system cannot or will not. Become independent from establishment-controlled paradigms. If you and your community do this, the system will have one of two choices:
1) Admit that you do not need them anymore and fade into the fog of history, OR…
2) Reveal its tyrannical nature in full and attempt to force you back into dependence.
In either case, the citizenry gains the upper hand. Even in the event of government retaliation or a full-blown shooting war, dissenting movements maintain the moral high ground, which is absolutely vital to legitimate victory. No revolutionary movement for freedom can succeed without honoring this rule. All independent solutions to social destabilization and despotism rely on it. Any solutions that ignore it are destined for failure.
I am hard-pressed to think of a better recent example of the non-participation principle in action than the rise of Mexican citizen militias in the Western state of Michoacan.
Michoacan, like most of Mexico, has long been overrun with violent drug cartels that terrorized private citizens while Mexican authorities did little to nothing in response. I could easily cite the abject corruption of the Mexican government as the primary culprit in the continued dominance of cartel culture. I could also point out the longtime involvement of the CIA in drug trafficking in Mexico and its negative effects on the overall social development of the nation. This is not conspiracy theory, but openly recognized fact.
The Mexican people have nowhere to turn; and this, in my view, has always been by design. Disarmed and suppressed while government-aided cartels bleed the public dry, it is no wonder that many Mexicans have turned to illegal immigration as a means of escape. The Mexican government, in turn, has always fought for a more porous border with the U.S. exactly because it WANTS dissenting and dissatisfied citizens to run to the United States instead of staying and fighting back. My personal distaste for illegal immigration has always been predicated on the fact that it allows the criminal oligarchy within Mexico to continue unabated without opposition. Unhappy Mexicans can simply run away from their problems to America and feed off our wide-open welfare system. They are not forced to confront the tyranny within their own country. Under this paradigm, Mexico would never change for the better.
Some in the Mexican public, however, have been courageous enough to stay and fight back against rampant theft, kidnapping and murder.
The people of Michoacan, fed up with the fear and subjugation of the cartels and the inaction of the government, have taken a page from the American Revolution, organizing citizen militias that have now driven cartels from the region almost entirely. These militias have decided to no longer rely upon government intervention and have taken independent action outside of the forced authoritarian structure.
The fantastic measure of this accomplishment is not appreciated by many people in America. Though many cartels are populated by well-trained former Mexican military special ops and even covert operations agents, the citizens of Michoacan have proven that the cartels are a paper tiger. They can be defeated through guerrilla tactics and force of will, which many nihilists often deny is even possible.
Joel Gutierrez, a militia member of the Michoacan region, says residents were “sick of the cartel kidnapping, murdering and stealing.”
“That’s why we took up arms,” says Gutierrez, 19. “The local and state police did nothing to protect us.”
The militia men have been patrolling their towns and inspecting cars at checkpoints like this one for nearly a year. All that time, federal police did little to stop them, and at times seemed to encourage the movement.
But that tacit approval appeared to end last weekend, when the number of the militias mushroomed and surrounded Apatzingan, a town of 100,000 people and the Knights Templar’s stronghold. A major battle between the militias and the cartel seemed imminent.
The federal government sent in thousands of police and troops to disarm the civilian patrols. A deadly confrontation ensued. Federal soldiers fired into a crowd of civilian militia supporters, killing two.
Militia leader Estanislao Beltran says the government should have gone after the real criminals, the Knights Templar, and not those defending themselves. He vehemently denies rumors that he takes funds from a rival group.
“The cartels have been terrorizing us for more than a decade,” Beltran says. “Why would we side with any of them?”
Initially, local authorities encouraged the militias, or stayed out of their way. The citizens armed themselves with semi-automatic weapons, risking government reprisal, in order to defend their homes; and so far, they have been victorious. One would think that the federal government of Mexico would be enthusiastic about such victories against the cartels they claim to have been fighting against for decades; but when common citizens take control of their own destinies, this often incurs the wrath of the establishment as well.
The Mexican government has decided to reward the brave people of Michoacan with the threat of military invasion and disarmament.
In some cases, government forces have indeed fired upon militia supporters, killing innocents while exposing the true intentions of the Mexican political structure.
Mainstream media coverage of the situation in the western states of Mexico has been minimal at best; and I find the more I learn about the movement in the region, the more I find a kinship with them. Whether we realize it or not, we are fighting the same fight. We are working toward the same goal of liberty, though we speak different languages and herald from different cultures. Recent government propaganda accusing Michoacan militias of “working with rival cartels” should ring familiar with those of us in the American liberty movement. We are the new “terrorists,” the new bogeymen of the faltering American epoch. We are painted as the villains; and in this, strangely, I find a considerable amount of solace.
If the liberty movement were not effective in its activism, if we did not present a legitimate threat to the criminal establishment, they would simply ignore us rather than seek to vilify us.
The militias of Michoacan have taken a stand. They have drawn their line in the sand, and I wish I could fight alongside them. Of course, we have our own fight and our own enemies to contend with here in the United States. As this fight develops, we have much to learn from the events in Western Mexico. Government retaliation has been met with widespread anger from coast to coast. And despite the general mainstream media mitigation of coverage, the American public is beginning to rally around the people of Michoacan as well. The non-participation principle prevails yet again.
The liberty movement in the U.S. must begin providing mutual aid and self-defense measures in a localized fashion if we have any hope of supplanting the effects of globalization and centralized Federal totalitarianism. We must begin constructing our own neighborhood watches, our own emergency response teams, our own food and medical supply stores, and our own alternative economies and trade markets that do not rely on controlled networks. We must break from the system and, in the process, break the system entirely.
Even now, we are beginning to understand the subversive transformation of our own law enforcement structure, and find a system designed to protect the criminal establishment, not the people. The FBI, for example, has recently changed the language of its primary mission statement, claiming that their goal is "national security", not law enforcement.
Police department across the U.S. are also changing how they interpret their mandate. U.S. courts have ruled that police departments do not have a constitutional duty to protect citizens from harm, rather, they simply exist to enforce legal code after a crime has already been perpetrated. This means that local police are no longer considered "peace officers", but agents of bureaucracy who are not necessarily required to defend the citizenry from violent action. The terrors Mexican citizens face in Michoacan are coming to America, and if disarmament proponents have their way, we will have no means to stop it.
I am growing increasingly exhausted with the incessant rationalizations of frightened activists posing as non-aggression proponents; the same kinds of people who refuse to even entertain the probability that physical self defense will be needed against corrupt government. The pungent smog of cowardice that follows them curls the nostrils, and the obvious transparency of their fear is a bit sickening. I wish I could convey how refreshing it is to witness a group of common people, regardless of nationality, with a set of brass ball bearings large enough to face off against government supported drug cartels notorious for mass murder and decapitation.
If you want see into the future, into the destiny of America, I suggest you examine carefully the developments of the Michoacan region. It is no mistake that good men and women are being disarmed around the world, and America is certainly not exempt. Look at what happens when we are not helpless! We can crush cold and calculating drug cartels as easily as we can crush psychopathic government entities. We are capable of superhuman feats. We are capable of globalist overthrow. We are capable of unthinkable greatness, as long as we are not distracted by false solutions and false leaders who lure us away from localized action towards centralized non-events.
The rise of Mexican non-participation groups gives me much hope for the future. For if the most corrupt and criminally saturated of societies can find it within themselves to fight, to truly fight, regardless of the obstacles and regardless of the supposed consequences, then there is a chance for us all. We must look beyond the odds of success and become men — real men — once again. We must face down evil, without reservation and without apprehension first by separating from the system, and then by standing our ground. We must be willing to risk everything; otherwise, there is absolutely nothing to gain.
You can contact Brandon Smith at: firstname.lastname@example.org Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better. To contribute to the growth of the Safe Haven Project, and to help us help others in relocating, or to support the creation of barter networks across the country, visit our donate page here: http://www.alt-market.com/donate