Your not a De Facto Judge, but a De Jure Judge, right? A lot of people have said you are not a real judge, but what they are trying to say is that your not a corporate judge. But why are people saying you are working for the Cartel/Vatican/Banking?
Next, Corporate U.S. and the European powers to be are suppose to hand the baton of power over to the eastern countries, but are not because they are seeking to retain this global power in fraud? But hasn’t the Pope relinquished the assets over through an agreement recently? Isn’t that what his recent visit was for, to enforce accountability?
Finally, can you explain a little more about this smooth transitional currency re-valuation for all countries and the planned systemic economic breakdown of the U.S.?
Judge Anna answers:
People are SO ignorant– it defies imagination….
When the Colonists came here they set up Common Law Courts and Amendment VII clearly requires American Common Law Courts to decide all matters affecting people and their property…But in 1965 the last counties and states incorporated their operations— and began operating under international law as a result.
All the courts were unlawfully converted to administrative, maritime, and admiralty jurisdiction. All our Public Offices were vacated, too. Read the Foreign Sovereigns Immunities Act and International Organizations Immunities Act–!!!!!!!
Believe it or not, that is what happened.
Therefore there are no American Common Law Courts, no access to the guarantees of the actual Constitution, no enforcement of the Public and Organic Law. Why? Because the people we trusted were lured by “federal revenue sharing”— a cut of the racketeering profits— and fundamentally changed the form of our government by incorporating.
We, the people, are still owed a Republican style of government and control of the land jurisdiction of this country, but all the people we thought we hired to do the work related to this got sidetracked off to serve other masters.
As a result, if we want American Common Law Courts and Sheriffs dedicated to enforcing the Law of the Land we have to provide those courts and perform those duties ourselves. Nobody else can do it for us and nobody on the public payroll is obligated to. Why?
Repeat after me: all levels of government in this country unlawfully converted themselves to operate as incorporated franchises of federal “parent” corporations.
They did this because they were greedy and paid off with “federal revenue sharing”— basically kickbacks from federal corporation racketeering.
That left us with all our Public Offices vacated.
Including our courts.
The courts have tried to work around the VII Amendment requirements by substituting international martial common law for American Common Law, but that clearly cannot be justified given the time and context in which the Seventh Amendment was written.
As for the pernicious (and WRONG) rumor that I “work for the Vatican”— I posted an answer—numerous times already. People who are too lazy to read will just have to twist their tails and spread lies.
Questions for Judge Anna – Can’t find you on the cabal’s list of Judges?
A lot of people support this…more would. but Anna Bruce Doucette and others refuse to answer basic as to who they are, who they work for and why they are tied to the government.. and has blood ties and titles.. how is it that they just say.. I’m a judge?? These and many other questions need to be answered. Most of all why there are warnings from other people to stay away from Bruce as he is nothing but trouble….if all is honest there should be no reason, why transparency into who these self proclaimed judges can’t be had and that ALL questions be answered truthfully and completely .
By Judge Anna Von Reitz
We HAVE answered and answered truthfully and completely, but as these comments clearly show other people are not bothering to read those answers clearly stated by us and by Public Law and in Congressional Records.
Yes, I have a very foreign given name, but no foreign “titles”— the kingdom that issued those titles is long gone. It ceased to exist in 1918— though some Americans obviously haven’t heard about the end of the Civil War much less World War I.
My Mother’s family have been here since the 1840’s, my Father’s Mother’s family, too, and his Father was born in Europe and emigrated prior to World War 1.
So WHAT? Anyone want to come fight me over being an “American”??? All you Olsons and Johnsons and DeSilvas and Geraghtys and Van Helgens and Smyth-Joneses and Whitsuns and Pulaskis and Ortegas? Are you “questioners” so clueless that you haven’t noticed that everyone in this country including the “Native Americans” originally came from somewhere else??? And so, why the supposed “issue” about my name?
There is no issue. I was born in Wisconsin in 1956, third generation on one side, fourth generation on the other and you and all the others who still haven’t heard The Big News can go to Clark County Wisconsin and stare at the records until you are all blue in the face. Then, if you have any sense or decency you can be ashamed.
Ditto the idiotic rumor that I am an “agent” of the Vatican. Did I EVER say anything to that effect EVER? The Vatican came into existence in 1929. How are they involved in something that happened in 1845???
What do the documents I signed actually say? I acted as private attorney for the Pope to inform his employees that they are doing things all wrong.
Anyone here disagree with that analysis of how the government corporations are functioning?
I get no paycheck from the Vatican nor from the Holy See for doing this task. It was the same task I was pursuing when we went to Rome and it is the same task afterward— with the important difference that the ultimate CEO of all these corporations AGREED with us that his employees are not performing their jobs correctly and need to full stop and reverse their course in order to avoid liquidation of their corporate charters.
There are many ways to correct an organization that is malfunctioning– in this case, the bank-run “governmental services corporations” are preying upon the people they are supposed to serve.
I already wasted years of my life griping to local, state, and federal officials so I took it to their Boss of Bosses.
And he fully agreed with us and has used the power of his office to undertake correction.
End of story. This is not a job. It is a mission: return American assets to the American People, honor the actual Constitution, get these banks and governmental services corpiorations back in line and end the criminal abuses that have been indulged in by the banks and lawyers.
Now, if any one of you want to be harassed and beaten and otherwise abused by armed commercial mercenaries operating under color of law—- just raise your hands.
If any of you want the value of your money and labor devalued to Third World standards— raise your hands.
If any of you want to lose title to your homes, lands, and businesses— raise your hands.
If anyone here wants the British Crown Corporation to own the copyright to your given name— and therefore a claim to “own” you as chattel backing their debts— raise your hands.
If anyone here wants the actual Constitution and its guarantees “vacated” so that it no longer exists except as a historical document—- raise your hands.
If anybody wants to live as a slave subject to the whims of a “Congress” functioning as the Board of Directors of a bankrupt “governmental services corporation”–either the Federal Reserve version doing business as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. or the IMF’s version doing business as the UNITED STATES, INC.—– just let me know.
I will make sure that your body, your labor, your home, land, children, businesses, heirlooms, share of public resources, credit, and everything else that is attached to your given name is either “donated” to these charming gentlemen and their banker masters or claimed by these same international vermin as “abandoned property”.
After all, the actual Constitution hasn’t been vacated thanks to the efforts of me and Bruce Doucette and others— and it guarantees your UNLIMITED right to contract.
All those who want to accuse us of anything can go line up for the cattle cars that FEMA has waiting. You can go to work as commercial mercenaries operating in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and herd your friends and neighbors into those cattle cars— until it is your turn to go.
You can all go to Hell as far as I am concerned. God gave you free will. I won’t stand in your way. Whatever you choose is good by me.
My only duty as a Christian is stand up and tell you what is going on and do my best to make sure that you HAVE a choice and that you are aware of what your choices are.
If you don’t want to believe all the Public Records we have presented already to back up what we’ve told you or are just too lazy to do any thinking or observing or research to confirm things for yourselves, that’s okay, too.
I am not here to run your life or seal your fate. I am only here to make sure I can look myself in the eye each morning and to do all that I can to protect my friends, neighbors, and countrymen—
As for being “judges” most of you don’t know what a judge is or how anything related to judicial services are supposed to work. You think that Bruce and I and others have set ourselves up as judges over you, but in fact, we have reclaimed Public Offices that are OWED to you, so that the Public Court System can be resurrected and the American Common Law Courts are functioning again.
Instead of standing around asking accusatory questions of us you ought to be reading everything we have already written and provided to explain this situation and THEN asking whatever questions are left.
My husband and I issued an official signed and witnessed affidavit of probable cause last June and published it on Amazon.com. It is called “You Know Something Is Wrong When….An American Affidavit of Probable Cause”. It contains all the history, all the references needed. And if that’s not enough there is also Disclosure 101 with eleven typewritten pages of references to public documents you can check out for yourself as “proof” of what I and the others have brought forward.
Now— this is the FINAL time I am answering anything about who I am or what I am doing for anyone. Paul– please put a flag on this post and if you get any more “questions” of this ilk addressed to you say “See post number______”. (Editors note. It will be article # 186 at www.annavonreitz.com)
And as for all the “Questioners” out there, I challenge you to become “Answerers” — either that, or let me know of your desire to donate yourself and all your rights and property interests to one of the bank-run governmental services corporations and I will gladly cross your name off the list of Americans who are asserting their birthright identity and reclaiming their estates and their lawful government on the land.
For all the “Questioners” who want to cast doubt and false accusations on me and Bruce Doucette—- suggest that you all read “Lifting the Veil” by Timothy Silver (the information quoted below might jar you loose) and watch the documentary “Merchants of Doubt”.
From “Lifting the Veil” by Timothy Silver:
“On June 6th 2013, it was revealed that Barack Obama oversaw the largest infringement of the Fourth Amendment in the history of the United States with the construction of a veritable surveillance state, capable of tracking the movements and communications of every American citizen. We now know that the NSA and United Kingdom counterpart GHCQ:
Collect the domestic meta-data of both parties in a phone-call.109
Set up fake internet cafes to steal data.110
Have intercepted the phone calls of at least 35 world leaders, including allies such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel.111
Can tap into the underwater fiber-optic cables that carry a majority of the world’s internet traffic.112
Track communications within media institutions such as Al Jazeera.113
Have ‘bugged’ the United Nations headquarters.114
Have set up a financial database to track international banking and credit card transactions.115
Collect and store over 200 million domestic and foreign text messages each day.116
“I, sitting at my desk, could wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email”. – Edward Snowden
Create maps of the social networks of United States citizens.118
Have access to smartphone app data.119
Use spies in embassies to collect data, often by setting up ‘listening stations’ on the roofs of buildings.120
Track reservations at upscale hotels.122
Have intercepted the talking-points of world leaders before meetings with Barack Obama.123
Can crack encryption codes on cellphones.124
Have implanted software on over 100,000 computers worldwide allowing them to hack data without internet connection, using radio waves.125
Have access to computers through fake wireless connections.126
Monitor communications in online games such as World of Warcraft.127
Intercept shipping deliveries and install back-door devices allowing access.128
Have direct access to the data centers of Google, Yahoo and other major companies.129
Covertly and overtly infiltrate United States and foreign IT industries to weaken or gain access to encryption, often by collaborating with software companies and internet service providers themselves. They are also, according to an internal document, “responsible for identifying, recruiting and running covert agents in the global telecommunications industry.”130
Use “honey traps”, luring targets into compromising positions using sex.131
Share raw intelligence data with Israel. Only official U.S. communications are affected, and there are no legal limits on the use of the data from Israel.132
Spy on porn habits of activists to discredit them.133
Possibly the most shocking revelation was made on February 24, 2014. Internal documents show that the NSA is attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with “extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction.”134 The documents revealed a top-secret unit known as the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Unit, or JTRIG.
Two of the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in an effort to discredit a target, and to use social sciences such as psychology to manipulate online discourse and activism in order to generate a desirable outcome. The unit posts false information on the internet and falsely attributes it to someone else, pretend to be a ‘victim’ of a target they want to discredit, and posts negative information on various forums. In some instances, to discredit a target, JTRIG sends out ‘false flag’ emails to family and friends.”
Remember what Will Rodgers said about taking wooden nickels and what your Grandma told you about the difference between s#$t and shinola. And then ask yourself who benefits?
How am I and Bruce Doucette benefiting by saving the actual Constitution contract and enforcing it? — Except in the sense that all Americans benefit?
And how are the “federal corporations” benefiting? — By creating and enforcing false claims against everyone’s labor and property interests and generating trillions of dollars worth of credit for their own use in the process. By creating and controlling giant trust and pension funds for their own use, which they employ to undermine other corporations and secure controlling ownership interests in the Fortune 500 and virtually everything else, too.
Wake up! Daylight in the swamps!
Comments Off on De Facto versus De Jure more questions for Judge Anna
There are two certificates– The Certificate of Live Birth and the Birth Certificate (Short Form) —- BOTH are securities and BOTH are bonds.
The difference is that the Certificate of Live Birth shows your given name in Upper and Lower Case and tells the day you were born and where you were born.
The short form shows a “birth date” and a birth place and everything is in all capital letters.
The Certificate of Live Birth belongs to the State of _________ corporation issuing it as an indemnification receipt— that is, an insurance receipt guaranteeing that you shall come to no harm as a result of their use of your given name to profit themselves.
The Birth Certificate on the other hand is issued by the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE which seizes upon your given name against the interests of the state where you were born and uses your given name to create a PERSON — which is not “born” but is “birthed”—- with the “birth” of this PERSON you, the baby, are declared “civilly dead” and your name and estate are deemed “granted” to the British Crown— the banks and the judiciary as chattel property— the “cargo” of a “vessel” in commerce.
This unholy and clandestine “system” results in your enslavement.
And it goes on worldwide wherever the banks and bar associations are tolerated.
The Certificate of Live Birth is proof that a baby was born and given your name on the land of a state of the Union.
The Birth Certificate is proof that your natural political status was changed without your knowledge or consent and that you and your estate were seized upon by the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation in criminal malfeasance and act of war against an innocent non- combatant “vessel” that is owed protected status.
These vile, despicable claims are against all law of the land and human dignity and against all treaties and international laws including all the United Declarations these scum have signed and hidden behind.
The other thing that people need to to grasp is that they themselves are the only source of this supposed “wealth”—- bonds are debts. They are promises to pay. Your work and your labor and even your body has been pledged by these bastards so that they could borrow virtually unlimited credit “in your name”—- and so they have. Just like any identity thief, they have used your name and borrowed assets from others using you, your labor, and your land, your homes, and your business as collateral.
They have claimed that your Mother gave you up knowingly and voluntarily as a baby and left you a “ward” of the “State”. Later when you came of age you did nothing to free yourself of this despicable presumption because of course you were never told anything about this and neither was your Mother— so the vermin “presumed” again that you were incompetent and should remain a “ward” of the STATE even as an adult because no sane man would tolerate the status of a slave and dependent surviving on whatever crumbs the criminals choose to give him as a “beneficiary” of the “PCT”— the Public Charitable Trust which was set up as welfare relief for indigent Negroes displaced from the plantations after the Civil War.
This is your thanks for fighting for the Union and standing by the British Monarch through Two World Wars.
If you are not angry yet, coldly, bitterly, intractably angry with all of it, and highly motivated to put an end to it— you should be. You should in fact be willing to crush all such “presumption” under your outraged feet and ready to see these “governmental services corporations” put out of business — permanently— and replaced by honest vendors of “public services”.
This requires the liquidation of the World Bank, IBRD, FEDERAL RESERVE, IMF, WELLS FARGO, and numerous other major banks which have operated the “governmental services corporations” as store fronts.
The FEDERAL RESERVE is operating THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC and the French-based IMF is operating the insolvent UNITED STATES, INC.
Both are crime syndicates engaged in armed racketeering, unlawful conversion, inland piracy, identity theft, credit fraud, probate fraud and impersonation of public officials.
These criminals have borrowed vast sums of money against you and your public and private assets, used the borrowed money to benefit themselves and their cronies, pushed the “credits cards” as far as they will go, then bowed out and sought bankruptcy protection for themselves—- while leaving you named as the “secondary” responsible for paying back all that money they borrowed and gave away or squandered or reinvested for their own benefit.
You see, they claimed to “represent” you like any flim-flam man. They offered your “registration” as proof. They claimed to own you and neither you nor anyone else was the wiser until the credit cards were maxed out and the bills came due.
That is what happened last March. The UNITED STATES, INC. run by the IMF didn’t pay even the interest on its debts, couldn’t even qualify to continue reorganization under Chapter 11.
So now they are being liquidated by mostly Swiss, Getman, and Chinese creditors who THINK that they are owed most of the land and mineral wealth of the western United States because these loathsome criminals behind these bank-run governmental services corporations— “pledged” you, your private property, and your public property to pay theirs debts without your knowledge or permission.
People think that these “Birth Certificates” are “worth millions”—– yes, millions of DEBT. Your supposed debt. And the people who owe you all the money and assets they received by pledging your labor and good name and credit? Why, they are either bankrupt, running, or nowhere to be found.
The thieves have in recent days tried to gag their accusers and made plans to murder their creditors so that they won’t have to pay back what they owe and so that they can claim the “leftover property” — everything that belongs to the victims — as “abandoned” property, just as they did to the Jews in Germany.
Time to wake up and put these vermin under the bus. Time to call up the Pope and the Pentagon and Secretary Ban Ki-Moon and Queen Elizabeth and all the others responsible for this circumstance and point out that the “derivative insurance” of the banks amounts to huge life insurance policies on the Americans and all the hapless people on this planet.
It is worse than a BAD Grade B Movie where the straying husband quietly takes out a million dollar life insurance policy on his wife, then kills her so he can run away with his mistress to the South Seas.
This is what these sickos think they can get away with, with nobody noticing— not even the other banks and insurance companies on the hook for this.
Everyone and I DO mean everyone needs to wake up and start bitching to the local politicians and documenting their family records and recording affidavits regarding their identities and natural birthright status and complaining to the Highest Heavens about this outrageous, immoral, criminal fraud scheme which has been played upon the whole world.
These vermin need to be tracked down, hunted as the criminals they are, all their assets seized for malicious tort fraud, identity theft, personage, barattry, probate and securities fraud, inland piracy, unlawful conversion, and FRAUD, FRAUD, FRAUD—which vitiates all claims and all contracts and for which there is no statute of limitations.
As for your “Certificate of Live Birth” get and Authenticated copy — authenticated at both the State Secretary of State and the U.S. Secretary of State. Record with the local land recorder’s office to prove you were born on the land and are a living American, not some “PERSON” and then “Return it for value” to these felons in suits— if you can resist the impulse to wad it up and shove it up their asses.
Buy no stories of free gold or vast riches or something for nothing. Take no wooden nickels. Sign nothing without a reservation of all rights. Study, study, study and realize that this “thing” that appears to be your government is NOT your government. It is a corporation — a “governmental services corporation” run by corrupt banks, having no more granted authority than JC PENNY or SEARS to run your life, extract your labor, make false claims against your property, harass you, indebt you, or make demands upon you based on statutory military common law.
Tell the “Members of Congress” that they don’t represent you and never have; tell them that instead, they are nothing but spokesmen and flunkies for a bank run governmental services corporation that is in commercial and administrative default and which needs to do away with Section 17 of the Trafing With The Enemy Act as amended by the Emergency Banking Relief Act of 1933 and stop pretending that we — their employers, benefactors, and priority creditors — are “enemies”— or we really will become enemies and start liquidating “government” corporations and laying off millions of “givernment” employees and liquidating the assets of the banks and the bank owners and operators– tell them that millions of people now know the truth. There is no escaping it now.
So they might as well come clean and do the right thing because everyone is tuned in and watching and we will all know what to think and do if they don’t.
Sorry this became such a long explanation but I have all these people wandering around thinking that they can get rich off their birth certificate when all that certificate has ever done for them is allow thieves to charge against their credit and rack up debt against them.
I hope that this explanation has made the situation clear–
U.S. SUPREME COURT AND OTHER HIGH COURT CITATIONS PROVING THAT NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYS
“The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.”
Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135 “The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business.” – Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784 “… the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference… is a fundamental constitutional right” -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979) “citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.”
Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009 “The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. . .”
Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). “The right to operate a motor vehicle [an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a mere privilege. It is a right of liberty, the enjoyment of which is protected by the guarantees of the federal and state constitutions.” Adams v. City of Pocatello, 416 P.2d 46, 48; 91 Idaho 99 (1966). “A traveler has an equal right to employ an automobile as a means of transportation and to occupy the public highways with other vehicles in common use.”
Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41. “The owner of an automobile has the same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A traveler on foot has the same right to the use of the public highways as an automobile or any other vehicle.” Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236. “The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which must be protected by the courts.” People v. Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971) “The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other vehicle.”
House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So. 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. “The automobile may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon the highways there is an equal right with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles. Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666. “The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. They have an equal right with other vehicles in common use to occupy the streets and roads. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Both have the right to use the easement.”
Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165 Ind. 465, 468. U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 2 2 “A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle.” Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159; Holland v. Shackelford, 137 S.E. 2d 298, 304, 220 Ga. 104; Stavola v. Palmer, 73 A.2d 831, 838, 136 Conn. 670 “There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts.” Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 “The word ‘automobile’ connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways.” -American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200 Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions: “(6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways…” 10) The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. “A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received.”
-International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term ‘motor vehicle’ is different and broader than the word ‘automobile.’” -City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232 “Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled” – Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20 ”
The Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of.” Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907). “…a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon…” State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516, Willis vs. Buck, 263 P. l 982;
Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 “The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived.” Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163 “the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business… is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all.” –
Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781 “Every Citizen has an unalienable RIGHT to make use of the public highways of the state; every Citizen has full freedom to travel from place to place in the enjoyment of life and liberty.” People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210. “No State government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways… transporting his vehicles and personal property for either recreation or business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege requiring licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances.”
Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22. “Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle “Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right… may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right.”
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 3 “The word ‘operator’ shall not include any person who solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation.”
Statutes at Large California Chapter 412 p.83 “Highways are for the use of the traveling public, and all have the right to use them in a reasonable and proper manner; the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen.” Escobedo v. State 35 C2d 870 in 8 Cal Jur 3d p.27 “RIGHT — A legal RIGHT, a constitutional RIGHT means a RIGHT protected by the law, by the constitution, but government does not create the idea of RIGHT or original RIGHTS; it acknowledges them. . . “ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. “Those who have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they already have right to do as such license would be meaningless.”
City of Chicago v Collins 51 NE 907, 910. “A license means leave to do a thing which the licensor could prevent.” Blatz Brewing Co. v. Collins, 160 P.2d 37, 39; 69 Cal. A. 2d 639. “The object of a license is to confer a right or power, which does not exist without it.” Payne v. Massey (19__) 196 SW 2nd 493, 145 Tex 273. “The court makes it clear that a license relates to qualifications to engage in profession, business, trade or calling; thus, when merely traveling without compensation or profit, outside of business enterprise or adventure with the corporate state, no license is required of the natural individual traveling for personal business, pleasure and transportation.”
Wingfield v. Fielder 2d Ca. 3d 213 (1972). “If [state] officials construe a vague statute unconstitutionally, the citizen may take them at their word, and act on the assumption that the statute is void.” –
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). “With regard particularly to the U.S. Constitution, it is elementary that a Right secured or protected by that document cannot be overthrown or impaired by any state police authority.” Donnolly vs. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 US 540; Lafarier vs. Grand Trunk R.R. Co., 24 A. 848; O’Neil vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. 887. “The right to travel (called the right of free ingress to other states, and egress from them) is so fundamental that it appears in the Articles of Confederation, which governed our society before the Constitution.”
(Paul v. Virginia). “[T]he right to travel freely from State to State … is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.” (U.S. Supreme Court,
Shapiro v. Thompson). EDGERTON, Chief Judge: “Iron curtains have no place in a free world. …’Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the Constitution.’
Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. 128, 45 L.Ed. 186. “Our nation has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases.” Id., at 197. Kent vs. Dulles see Vestal, Freedom of Movement, 41 Iowa L.Rev. 6, 13—14. “The validity of restrictions on the freedom of movement of particular individuals, both substantively and procedurally, is precisely the sort of matter that is the peculiar domain of the courts.” Comment, 61 Yale L.J. at page 187. “a person detained for an investigatory stop can be questioned but is “not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest.”Justice White, Hiibel “Automobiles have the right to use the highways of the State on an equal footing with other vehicles.”
Cumberland Telephone. & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. “Each citizen has the absolute right to choose for himself the mode of conveyance he desires, whether it be by wagon or carriage, by horse, motor or electric car, or by bicycle, or astride of a horse, subject to the sole condition that he will observe all those requirements that are known as the law of the road.”
Swift v City of Topeka, 43 U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 4 Kansas 671, 674. The Supreme Court said in U.S. v Mersky (1960) 361 U.S. 431: An administrative regulation, of course, is not a “statute.” A traveler on foot has the same right to use of the public highway as an automobile or any other vehicle.
Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) 185. Automotive vehicles are lawful means of conveyance and have equal rights upon the streets with horses and carriages.
Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 205; See also: Christy v. Elliot, 216 Ill. 31; Ward v. Meredith, 202 Ill. 66; Shinkle v. McCullough, 116 Ky. 960; Butler v. Cabe, 116 Ark. 26, 28-29. …automobiles are lawful vehicles and have equal rights on the highways with horses and carriages. Daily v. Maxwell, 133 S.W. 351, 354. Matson v. Dawson, 178 N.W. 2d 588, 591. A farmer has the same right to the use of the highways of the state, whether on foot or in a motor vehicle, as any other citizen.
Draffin v. Massey, 92 S.E.2d 38, 42. Persons may lawfully ride in automobiles, as they may lawfully ride on bicycles. Doherty v. Ayer, 83 N.E. 677, 197 Mass. 241, 246; Molway v. City of Chicago, 88 N.E. 485, 486, 239 Ill. 486; Smiley v. East St. Louis Ry. Co., 100 N.E. 157, 158. “A soldier’s personal automobile is part of his ‘household goods[.]’
U.S. v Bomar, C.A.5(Tex.), 8 F.3d 226, 235” 19A Words and Phrases – Permanent Edition (West) pocket part 94. “[I]t is a jury question whether … an automobile … is a motor vehicle[.]” United States v Johnson, 718 F.2d 1317, 1324 (5th Cir. 1983). Other right to use an automobile cases: – EDWARDS VS. CALIFORNIA, 314 U.S. 160 –
TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78 – WILLIAMS VS. FEARS, 179 U.S. 270, AT 274 – CRANDALL VS. NEVADA, 6 WALL. 35, AT 43-44 – THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492 – U.S. VS. GUEST, 383 U.S. 745, AT 757-758 (1966) – GRIFFIN VS. BRECKENRIDGE, 403 U.S. 88, AT 105-106 (1971) – CALIFANO VS. TORRES, 435 U.S. 1, AT 4, note 6 – SHAPIRO VS. THOMPSON, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) – CALIFANO VS. AZNAVORIAN, 439 U.S. 170, AT 176 (1978) Look the above citations up in American Jurisprudence. Some citations may be paraphrased.
As history will teach you, there was a time when America had men of honor in control, but the money provided by the banking cartel eventually diluted their influence, and the department of education, or more correctly lack of it, finally won the day and provided a majority who did not know what freedom really was. All it takes to overthrow a nation is an ignorant population, and a few greased politicians. The Bankers have proved beyond doubt that money can control people, governments, commerce, and the churches. We now grovel at the Bankers feet; to continue our miserable lives; all the while praying in Government Controlled Churches for salvation.
Comments Off on U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets
Recommended by R.E. Sutherland, M.Ed./ sciences Freelance Investigative Science Reporter since 1996 firstname.lastname@example.org
VIDEO: (5.39 minutes)
REPORTER NOTES: Direct Transcript from the video…must see video for photos
The House of Rothschild is widely considered to be the richest family in the world with estimates of net worth ranging from $500 billion in personal assets to $100 trillion n financial assets. It has been at the hub of global finance since the 1760s, with Mayer Amschel Rothschild placing his 5 sons in the world’s 5 financial centers.
The family solidified its global reach in the 19 century by funding monarchies, governments, and both sides in the Napleonic wars.
A newspaper at the time described the family as the “brokers and counselors of the Kings of Europe and the republican chiefs for America.”
Today the Rothschild family is said to maintain its control through the US Federal Reserve having deployed its agent, Paul Warburg, to create the powerful quasi-government entity in 1913.
The Rockefeller family empire began in 1870 when John D. Rockefeller founded the Standard Oil Company that would make him the richest single person in history with a net worth of $400 billion.
Recognizing the threat of such wealth, President Theodore Roosevelt warned that Rockefeller interests were creating an invisible government.
The Rockefeller plan has since included funding the United Nations headquarters and founding the Bilderberg conference of the global super elite.
Today the Rockefeller family continues its agenda through controlling interests in Chase Manhattan Bank, ExxonMobil, Chevron, and BP.
The House of Morgan ascended when John Pierpont Morgan and the Rothschilds gave the US Treasury 3.5M ounces of gold during the Panic of 1893.
Having control of the U.S. gold supply, Morgan financed the creation of America’s largest corporations including GE, AT&T, and US Steel.
This leverage over the Treasury led to charges that the family forced America into the World War I to protect loans made to Russia and France.
J.P. Morgan Jr. provided a $500M war loan and collected a 1% commission on the supplies his corporations provided.
It is also rumored that the Morgans played a role in encouraging the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor by conspiring to share war profits with the Iwasaki and Dan clans who owned Mitsubishi and Mitsui.
Today the House of Morgan maintains the world’s largest private gold vault – allegedly linked by tunnel to the New York Federal Reserve Bank.
Eleuthere Irenee du Pont de Nemours founded the Du Pont family empire in 1802 when he established a gunpowder mill in Delaware.
The Du Pont family rooted itself in US affairs, using back-channel connections with Napoleon to negotiate the Louisiana Purchase in 1803.
By WWI, the Du Pont Company was supplying 40% of the world’s explosives, and by WWII it was producing plutonium for US atomic bombs. It’s believed that the Du Pont family’s support of US war efforts allowed it to dictate the prohibition of hemp farming and marijuana use in order to protect their nylon manufacturing business.
Today the DuPont corporation is the 2nd largest producer of GMO seeds in the world and it actively funds a “doomsday seed vault” that ensures its product can REPLANT the earth AFTER a global disaster.
1: BUSH The Bush political dynasty began with Prescott Sheldon Bush, who was born in 1895 and attended Yale University as a member of the Skull and Bones Society.
In 1933, it is rumored that Bush led a failed coup attempt against president FDR (funded by the DuPont’s, Rockefellers, and Morgans).
The “Business Plot” was covered up and Bush rose to be director of Union Banking Corporation when it was suspected of hiding NAZI gold during WWII.
Both Prescott’s son, George HW, and grandson, George W, became President of the United States and both initiated wars with Iraq that profited companies with Bush family ties, such as Halliburton and KBR.
Today the Bushes are considered the most powerful family in US politics, having significant fortunes in banking and oil and having yet another member, Jeb, running to be the next us president.
What is not mentioned here is the thousands of super rich that has assisted in building a multimillion man army of politicians and plutocrats all over the world, who are the instigators and managers of the creation of a one world government corporation, which precludes any participation in determining who the leaders are by corporate fiat. All this was made possible by the Bankruptcies of early American government from war depts., resulting in the corporatization of America. The scumbag employees of the Bankers are what we call our Congressmen, Senators, Supreme Court Judges and Presidents. This same method was used to corporatize our State Governments, Counties, and Cities. Among the most successful of their accomplishments was in controlling Education and making intellectual surfs of our most valuable assets; our children who grow up supporting them. Now is the time for all courageous men to come to the aid of our country, shouting “Give us Liberty, or Give us Death”! There is no dishonor in protecting LIBERTY!
Comments Off on 5 Most Powerful Families That Secretly Control The World
Michael Gaddy is a political activist, writer and teacher who defends and teaches the Constitution as ratified (Originalist), our Bill of Rights and the tenets of our Declaration of Independence. He is constantly trying to understand why the great majority of people in this country are content being slaves to an unconstitutional, criminal government; a government that is systematically destroying the intent of the founders of this country and the culture that brought us Liberty and Individual Freedom. Dependent on readers in continuing this effort, please support his work by mail at: 404 West Main St. PMB 121, Cortez, CO 81321.
“It is forbidden to kill, therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets” ~Voltaire
On January 26, 2016, Robert LaVoy Finicum was murdered on a lonely stretch of highway in Oregon by as yet unnamed government employees. It was murder in the first degree for it meets all four of the legal tenets for such a crime.
Purposely. Lavoy Finicum, Ammon Bundy, Shawna Cox, Ryan Bundy, Victoria Sharp and others were purposely led into the aforementioned lonely stretch of highway in Oregon specifically to engage them in circumstances which favored the employees of the state while minimizing any form of defense or retaliation. There was obvious prior knowledge by employees of the state as to the direction and route the above parties would be traveling. (obvious plant inside) Thus, the stretch of highway that provided no cell phone service; the obviously pre-planned and set up roadblock; snipers deployed in the surrounding woods and the firing upon the vehicle(s) when no shots had been fired from those vehicles at the government employees. Going 70 mph on a public road to avoid being shot does not necessitate a death penalty. The employees of the state have no valid claims of self-defense.
Knowingly: This point is easily established by the previously mentioned facts in evidence. The employees of the government knowingly led the Bundys, Finicum and others into a pre-planned scenario complete with a roadblock which created the desired “kill zone.” Recklessly: Government employees recklessly fired deadly weapons into the vehicle(s) containing people who at the time had no wants or warrants outstanding against them, nor were they fleeing the scene of a crime. Therefore, there existed no probable cause for the actions of members of law enforcement be they local, state or federal.
Negligently: there is a multitude of available evidence which indicates the entire operation conducted by law enforcement on that day was negligent in the extreme. Officers could have detained and questioned all involved—if that was their true intent—-which the planned roadblock and weapons fired into occupied vehicles proves otherwise. On numerous occasions, Bundy, Finicum and others were seen in and around town, even traveling to the airport where the FBI command post was located to engage the leadership there in conversation. Ammon even asked if any of the officers were LDS. (Mormons) A peaceful arrest could have occurred there or various other locations with little fanfare or shooting. But, acting out of pure negligence and malice aforethought, members of law enforcement opted instead for what became a deadly shootout with totally unnecessary loss of life and freedom. These acts on the part of these particular government employees were premeditated and designed to produce the desired outcome.
Legal charges which were made against Bundy and others retroactively did not constitute probable cause for the initiation of the stop or deadly force. Probable cause cannot be established ex post facto. Every single bit of evidence provided by the so-called “authorities” in this crime further indicts their actions. The actions of the government employees are Prima facie evidence the desired end results were achieved as planned.
Someone was going to pay dearly for the egg on the face of the federal sheriffs that occurred in Bunkerville, Nevada in April of 2014. They reestablished their dominion and control over the masses by shooting LaVoy Finicum in the back at least twice, therefore taking his life. Shooting someone in the back is an act of total cowardice. The federal sheriffs have become characters not unlike Robert Ford of Jesse James fame. “It was a dirty little coward who shot Mr. Howard…” Once in America it was seen as dishonorable to shoot anyone in the back, even a wanted criminal.
It appears the state sheriffs in Oregon who shot Lavoy in the back are having problems with some members of the SS death squad of the federal sheriffs (FBI Hostage, Rescue Team HRT) for shooting and missing LaVoy Finicum and then lying about shooting at all. Of course we remember the HRT who were deployed at the Weaver home in 1993, where again, another victim of tyranny was shot in the back (preferred tactic of cowards) this time 14 year-old Samuel Weaver with his mother Vicki shot in the face while holding her infant daughter shortly thereafter. Of course the FBI HRT member, one Lon Horiuchi, who shot the unarmed and infant toting Mrs. Weaver, would later plead the 5th Amendment when questioned about his cowardly act before the US Senate. Ironic is it not these federal sheriff assassins demand their constitutional rights when confronted with denying the right to life, liberty and happiness to others?
At some point in time the federal macho men are going to claim they were acting in accordance with the request of the governor of Oregon. But, again, that damned constitution is going to get in their way—-not really. Was the legislature of the state of Oregon in session when the Oregon governor asked for federal intervention? If not, was it possible to call them into session? Governor Kate Brown said on January 2, 2016: [Federal officials] “must move quickly to end the occupation and hold all of the wrongdoers accountable.” “This spectacle of lawlessness must end, and until Harney County is free of it, I will not stop insisting that federal officials enforce the law.”
Liberty, Justice and the American people continue to pay a terrible price for electing people to high office who wouldn’t know the Constitution if they found it floating in their morning coffee. Article IV Section IV of said Constitution specifically states the legislature of a state, not the governor, is responsible for calling in the central government to deal with “domestic violence.” The governor cannot do so if the legislature is in session or can be called into session. Of course, with the collection of constitutionally ignorant air wasters currently serving in most state legislatures, the results probably would not have been much different.
The evidence the ambush of the Bundy/Finicum party was deliberately and precisely planned to end the way it did, with the exception the forces manning that ambush were resolved to take out as many people as they could, is irrefutable. This is corroborated by the number of shots fired at the vehicle after LaVoy Finicum had been shot in the back and lay dying, without help, in the snow. The 18 year old lady who was in the vehicle at the time was released, without charges, even though her life was in constant jeopardy by government agents shooting indiscriminately into the vehicle where she was a passenger. She has a valid case of attempted murder against all the government agents present at that shooting. Don’t hold your breath.
There is the charge that LaVoy Finicum was reaching for a gun, and a gun conveniently appeared to support the government’s allegation. There is an issue here of course of whether he was reaching for that weapon or whether his was a reaction to having already been shot. A huge issue is that Finicum and the others in his vehicle had been fired on before he exited that vehicle. No one can deny for a moment that he exited his vehicle with his hands up.
LaVoy Finicum was shot in the back at least twice, according to the autopsy, a cowardly act by men in body armor, some cowering in fear behind cover. Economics Professor and columnist Walter E. Williams once asked and then answered his own question. The question was: How can you tell when your government is violating its authority? Professor William’s answer was most relevant to the subject of this Rant. It was: If the government is doing something, that if you did the same thing, you would go to jail, the government is acting outside its authority.
Apply this answer please to the ambush and death of LaVoy Finicum. Switch roles. If the government employees were to have been driving down the road and a group like the Bundys and others attempted to stop them, say for a citizen’s arrest, while standing armed on the side of the road and behind cover, and the government employees attempted to exit the obvious threat and failing to do so one of them exited his vehicle with his hands up and was promptly shot in the back and killed, would those who did so be charged with a crime?
If you believe, even for a nanosecond, that federal, state and local sheriffs have a right and subsequent immunity for doing what they did to LaVoy Finicum and the others sitting in prison, simply because they were acting under the color of authority, your proper place of residence should be in the old Soviet Union, Cambodia under Pol Pot or Nazi Germany. Any freedom and liberty that you experience is wasted on an undeserving dolt. Samuel Adams, a true and faithful Patriot to his death, had some words especially for you: “Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; may your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
IN RIGHTFUL REBEL LIBERTY
Michael is a political activist, writer and teacher who defends and teaches the Constitution as ratified (Originalist), our Bill of Rights and the tenets of our Declaration of Independence. He is constantly trying to understand why the great majority of people in this country are content being slaves to an unconstitutional, criminal government; a government that is systematically destroying the intent of the founders of this country and the culture that brought us Liberty and Individual Freedom. Dependent on readers in continuing this effort, please support his work by mail at: 404 West Main St. PMB 121, Cortez, CO 81321.
New federal guidelines have just been introduced across the country, and what they mandate is quite disturbing to civil libertarians. The FBI has now instructed high schools across the nation to report students who in any way criticize government policies and what the report phrases as “western corruption. ”The FBI is interested in determining – as part of some warped “pre-crime” program – who might become potential future terrorists. The FBI warns in the report that that “anarchist extremists” are no different that ISIS terrorists.
They further caution teachers against young people who are poor, as well as immigrants and others who travel to “suspicious” countries. These, they explain, are teens who are more likely to commit terrorism.
Sarah Lazare, writing for AlterNet, notes that “based on the widely unpopular British ‘anti-terror’ mass surveillance program, the FBI’s ‘Preventing Violent Extremism in Schools’ guidelines, released in January, are almost certainly designed to single out and target Muslim-American communities.”
Lazare notes that the FBI cautions teachers to “avoid the appearance of discrimination,” in carrying out the order to spy on students and report them to the Bureau.
“The agency identifies risk factors that are so broad and vague that virtually any young person could be deemed dangerous and worthy of surveillance, especially if she is socio-economically marginalized or politically outspoken,” she notes.
This overwhelming threat is then used to justify a massive surveillance apparatus, wherein educators and pupils function as extensions of the FBI by watching and informing on each other.
The FBI’s justification for such surveillance is based on McCarthy-era theories of radicalization, in which authorities monitor thoughts and behaviors that they claim to lead to acts of violent subversion, even if those people being watched have not committed any wrongdoing. This model has been widely discredited as a violence prevention method, including by the US government, but it is now being imported to schools nationwide as official federal policy.
The new guidelines suggest that “high school students are ideal targets for recruitment by violent extremists seeking support for their radical ideologies, foreign fighter networks, or conducting acts of violence within our borders.”
The paranoid of the document warns that the youth “possess inherent risk factors” that predispose them to being terrorists.
The FBI suggests that all teachers “incorporate a two-hour block of violent extremism awareness training” into their core curriculum for all high school students in the United States.
According to the FBI’s educational materials for teenagers, circulated as a visual aide to their new guidelines, the following offenses constitute signs that “could mean that someone plans to commit violence” and therefore should be reported: “Talking about traveling to places that sound suspicious”; “Using code words or unusual language”; “Using several different cell phones and private messaging apps”; and “Studying or taking pictures of potential targets (like a government building).”
Under the category of domestic terrorists, the educational materials warn of the threat posed by “anarchist extremists.” The FBI states, “Anarchist extremists believe that society should have no government, laws, or police, and they are loosely organized, with no central leadership… Violent anarchist extremists usually target symbols of capitalism they believe to be the cause of all problems in society – such as large corporations, government organizations, and police agencies.”
But the FBI didn’t stop at the ISIS boogymanning. They warn teachers of “Animal Rights Extremists and Environmental Extremists” who are – to the FBI – no different than “white supremacy extremists,” ISIS and Al Qaeda terrorists.
All of these are “out to recruit high school students,” in the FBI’s mind, according to Lazare.
The materials also instruct students to watch out for extremist propaganda messages that communicate criticisms of “corrupt western nations” and express “government mistrust.”
If you “see suspicious behavior that might lead to violent extremism,” the resource states, consider reporting it to “someone you trust,” including local law enforcement officials like police officers and FBI agents.
Lazare posits that “young Muslims are the real targets” of the FBI’s high school spy program.
At the surface level, the FBI’s new guidelines do not appear to single out Muslim students. The document and supplementary educational materials warn of a broad array of threats, including anti-abortion and white supremacist extremists. The Jewish Defense League is listed alongside Hizbollah and Al Qaeda as an imminent danger to young people in the United States.
But a closer read reveals that the FBI consistently invokes an Islamic threat without naming it. Cultural and religious differences, as well as criticisms of western imperialism, are repeatedly mentioned as risk factors for future extremism. “Some immigrant families may not be sufficiently present in a youth’s life due to work constraints to foster critical thinking,” the guidelines state.
“The document aims to encourage schools to monitor their students more carefully for signs of radicalization but its definition of radicalization is vague,” Arun Kundnani, the author of The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, extremism, and the domestic War on Terror notes. “Drawing on the junk science of radicalization models, the document dangerously blurs the distinction between legitimate ideological expression and violent criminal actions.”
“In practice, schools seeking to implement this document will end up monitoring Muslim students disproportionately,” Kundnani said. “Muslims who access religious or political material will be seen as suspicious, even though there is no reason to think such material indicates a likelihood of terrorism.”
Oddly, however, the FBI’s new guidelines say that they do “not advocate the application of any psychological or demographic ‘profiles’ or check lists of indicators to identify students on a pathway to radicalization.”
As Hugh Handeyside, staff attorney for the ACLU’s national security project, said that “broadening the definition of violent extremism to include a range of belief-driven violence underscores that the FBI is diving head-first into community spying. Framing this conduct as ‘concerning behavior’ doesn’t conceal the fact that the FBI is policing students’ thoughts and trying to predict the future based on those thoughts.”
Are you concerned about the FBI’s new “pre-crime” high school spying program?
Is there any level this government will not stoop to? How can we as a Nation survive if we have not the courage to attack this insult to our people and theft of our dignity.
Comments Off on FBI Orders Teachers To Report Students Who Question Government
“That’s the way the ruling class operates in any society. They keep the lower and the middle classes fighting with each other… Anything different—that’s what they’re gonna talk about—race, religion, ethnic and national background, jobs, income, education, social status, sexuality, anything they can do to keep us fighting with each other, so that they can keep going to the bank!”—Comedian George Carlin
“We the people” have been utterly and completely betrayed. The politicians “we the people” most trusted to look out for our best interests, protect our rights, and ensure that the nation does not slip into tyranny have cheated on us, lied to us, swindled us, deceived us, double-crossed us, and sold us to the highest bidder.
Time and again, they have shown in word and deed that their priorities lay elsewhere, that they care nothing about our plight, that they owe us no allegiance, that they are motivated by power and money rather than principle, that they are deaf to our entreaties, that they are part of an elite ruling class that views us as mere cattle, that their partisan bickering is part of an elaborate ruse to keep us divided and distracted, and that their oaths of office to uphold the Constitution mean nothing. Incredibly, even in the face of their treachery and lies, the great majority of Americans persist in believing that the politicians have the people’s best interests at heart.
Despite the fact that we’ve been burned before, most Americans continue to allow themselves to be bamboozled into casting their votes for one candidate or another, believing that this time they mean what they say, this time they really care about the citizenry, this time will be different.
Of course, they rarely ever mean what they say, they care about their constituents only to the extent that it advances their political careers, and it never turns out differently. We are as easily discarded the day after the elections as we were wantonly wooed in the months leading up to the big day. Those same politicians who were once so eager to pose for our pictures, smile at our jokes, and glad-hand us for our votes will, upon being elected, retreat behind a massive, impenetrable wall that ensures we are not seen or heard from again—at least, until the next election.
The joke is on us.
As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, all of the caucuses, primaries, nominating conventions, town hall meetings, rallies, meet and greets, delegates and super-delegates are sophisticated schemes aimed at advancing the illusion of participation culminating in the reassurance ritual of voting.
It’s not about Red Republicans or Blue Democrats. It’s about Green Donors—i.e, those with money who can afford to pay for access.
Votes might elect politicians, but as a 2014 field experiment by political scientists at Yale University and the University of California, Berkeley, makes clear, it’s money that talks.
The experiment went something like this: members of Congress were contacted by constituents requesting meetings about pending public policy issues. As the Washington Post reports, “When the attendees were revealed to be ‘local campaign donors,’ they often gained access to Members of Congress, Legislative Directors, and Chiefs of Staff. But when the attendees were described as only ‘local constituents,’ they almost never gained this level of access.” Conclusion: money buys access to politicians who are otherwise deaf, dumb and blind to the entreaties of their constituents. It works the same with every politician and every party. Indeed, the First Amendment’s assurance of a right to petition the government for a redress of grievances has become predicated on how much money you’re willing to shell out in order to gain access to your elected and appointed officials.
Then again, money has always played a starring role in American politics.
The spoils system reared its greedy head under Andrew Jackson, who traded jobs in his administration in exchange for campaign contributions. For $1 million, donors could take part in Warren Harding’s poker parties and enjoy a sleepover at the White House. Lyndon Johnson had a President’s Club that cost donors $1000 a year. Nixon was prepared to sell ambassadorships for $250,000. And Bill Clinton famously allowed top-dollar donors to spend a night in the Lincoln Bedroom at the White House in exchange for roughly $5.4 million in donations to the Democratic National Committee. Fast forward to the present day, and a $500,000 donation might get you invited to a quarterly meeting with Barack Obama. For a mere $5,000 donation, lobbyists are being given exclusive invitations to join Congressmen and senators for weekend getaways that include wine tastings, fly fishing, skiing, golfing, hunting, spas, seaside cocktail parties and more.
If you’re just a lowly citizen with limited cash, however, you’re out of luck.
Try contacting your so-called representatives without paying for the privilege, and see how far that gets you. I can assure you that you won’t be given the kinds of access that lobbyists, special interest groups and top donors enjoy. Having been saddled with a pay-to-play system that provides access only to those with enough cash to grease the wheels of the political machine, average Americans have little to no say in the workings of their government and even less access to their so-called representatives.
Donald Trump, as he has boasted, might be able to buy and sell politicians of all stripes (including Hillary Clinton), but the average American would be hard-pressed to get the kind of access enjoyed by corporate executives, lobbyists and other members of the moneyed elite.
Indeed, members of Congress have to work hard to keep their constituents at a distance—minimizing town-hall meetings, making minimal public appearances while at home in their districts, only appearing at events in controlled settings where they’re the only ones talking, and if they must interact with constituents, doing so via telephone town meetings or impromptu visits to local businesses where the chances of being accosted by angry voters are greatly minimized. And under the Trespass Bill, passed by Congress in 2012 and signed into law by President Obama, if you dare to exercise your First Amendment right to speak freely to a politician, assemble in public near a politician, or petition a government official for a redress of grievances, you risk a fine or a lengthy stay in prison.
Talk about self-serving.
Under the guise of protecting government officials from physical attacks, the Trespass Bill, a.k.a. “the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act,” criminalizes First Amendment activity by making it a federal offense, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, to protest anywhere the Secret Service might be guarding someone. Mind you, the Secret Service not only protects the president but all past sitting presidents, members of Congress, foreign dignitaries, presidential candidates, and anyone whom the president determines needs protection, but is also in charge of securing National Special Security Events, which include events such as the G8 and NATO summits, the National Conventions of both major parties, and even the Super Bowl.
The law essentially creates a roving bubble zone where the First Amendment is effectively off-limits, thereby putting an end to free speech, political protest and the right to peaceably assemble in all areas where government officials happen to be present. Thus, simply walking by one of these events could make you subject to arrest.
“What that means in practice,” as The Intercept rightly points out, “is that campaign rallies for Donald Trump, who was granted Secret Service protection in November, and Hillary Clinton, who will be guarded for life as a former first lady, are the very opposite of free speech zones under federal law. (The restrictions also apply to all appearances by former presidents and first ladies, as well as those of two other candidates, Bernie Sanders and Ben Carson, who are currently protected by the service.)”
Consider yourself warned: If you do dare to show up to a Trump or Clinton rally and even appear to be the kind of person who might engage in any kind of protest, lawful or otherwise, you could find yourself quickly dispatched to a “free speech zone” out of sight and sound of the candidates. (“Free speech zones” are government-sanctioned areas located far away from government officials, into which activists and citizens are herded at political rallies and events.) In fact, that’s exactly what happened to a group of black students at a recent Trump rally in Georgia. They were escorted by police to “‘free speech zones’ in a field shielded from the venue by a set of tennis courts, or outside a church about a quarter of a mile away.”
The message is clear: in an age of robber barons, “we the people” are expected to just shut up and vote.
The powers-that-be want us to be censored, silenced, muzzled, gagged, zoned out, caged in and shut down. They want our speech and activities monitored for any sign of “extremist” activity. They want us to be estranged from each other and kept at a distance from those who are supposed to represent us. They want taxation without representation. They want a government without the consent of the governed.
They want the police state.
The system has been so corrupted and compromised that there are few left in the halls of government who hear or speak for us. Congress does not represent us. The courts do not advocate for us. The president does not listen to us. And the First Amendment’s assurance of the right to speak freely and petition our government for a redress of grievance no longer applies to us.
So if representative government has become an exercise in futility, where does that leave us? One of the key ingredients in maintaining democratic government is the right of citizens to freely speak their minds to those who represent them. In fact, it is one of the few effective tools we have left to combat government corruption and demand accountability.
If there is to be any hope of righting the wrongs that are being perpetrated against the American people, we must make them—our elected officials—hear us.
But where to begin?
Start by opening up a dialogue within your own community about what’s wrong with this country. Stop focusing on the issues that divide, and find common ground with your fellow citizens about issues on which you can agree. Focus less on politics and more on principles. Stop buying into the false and divisive narratives that are being promulgated by political windbags and start thinking and speaking for yourselves.
Once you’ve found that common ground, whatever it might be, make enough noise at the local level—at your city council meetings, in your local paper, at your school board meetings, in front of your courthouses and police stations—and the message will trickle up. Those in power may not like what they hear, but they will hear you. Remember, there is power in numbers.
There are 319 million of us in this country. Imagine what we could accomplish if we actually worked together, presented a united front, and spoke with one voice?
The police state wouldn’t stand a chance.
I have to admit; I would follow this man around like a puppy if he would only tell you the truth about American governance. John when are you going to inform the people they do not have a democratic government? It is a tri-party oligarchy totally owned and controlled by the City of London Bankers, the Queen of England, and the Pope! Go to this web site and start your own search for truth: http://www.annavonreitz.com/ Buy this book and get all the details in one short read. You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause(Paperback) by Judge Anna Maria Riezinger & James Clinton Belcherhttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1491279184/ref=cm_cr_asin_lnk
Comments Off on Just Shut Up and Vote: The Futility of Representative Government in an Age of Robber Barons
For the first few years of America’s existence, the country did not have a Constitution. Rather, it had the Articles of Confederation. The Articles specified that most government power would be given to the individual states. In fact, the push for state’s rights under the Articles was so strong that the following was written in it:
“Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated.”
This is a far cry from today’s federal government that presumes to reverse decisions made at a state level. Rather than treating state as an independent nation, it appears that today’s government treats each state as a satellite nation- each one having no right to secede from the union as a whole.
Though the colonies joined together for common cause in the American Revolution, the notion that they were allowed to leave the union they had voluntarily joined faded from memory until it was readily accepted that each state was a part of the country no matter what.
The Articles of Confederation lasted for seven years from the date of its ratification to the date when the Constitution replaced it. Now, adoption of the Constitution was a very tricky process. From the beginning of the Constitution’s introduction to the several states, two factions debated through public newspapers whether there should be a strong national government (they were called Federalists) or whether a strong national government presented a danger to the country (they were called the Anti-Federalists). Each side had their own respective viewpoints.
The primary reason to establish a federal government in the first place was to protect the country from foreign powers attempting to wage war upon it. Although George Washington (among others) would later declare that the United States would not be entangled with foreign alliances, the need for citizens to protect themselves against the cannons of King George (for example) was very real. In those days, European nations went to war with each other at the drop of a hat. Those who envisioned a national government also envisioned it as a bulwark against foreign invasion.
On the other hand, if the Anti-Federalists were concerned about foreign invasion, they did not use it as their central argument during 1788 and 1789 when articles in the newspaper appeared under the pseudonym “Brutus.”
Much of what happened in the Constitutional Convention had already given the citizens of the new nation cause for concern. The Convention met in secret in Philadelphia. The document they drafted was not offered to the American public until after its completion. The states could decide to ratify it or not; however, they had no say in what its content might be. They could only reject it.
Even worse, the Constitution only needed nine out of thirteen states to be ratified. If four states dissented, they would be forced to accept the Constitution whether they liked it or not.
Changing the Constitution was a difficult matter, as well. People could neither change it good or for bad easily. From the beginning, the mechanism of the Constitution’s amending introduced a slow, inefficient process that once more allowed most people in the country to only say yes or no to a proposed change.
Later, it would prove that, after the passage of tariff known as the Tariff of Abominations in 1828, no country would be allowed to leave the union. South Carolina hated the tariff. The state was on the point of seceding from the union only to discover that President Andrew Jackson was ready to invade South Carolina with the American army just to keep a group of dissenters in line. In this way, it may be observed that the nation of America (whatever form it has taken) has always leaned towards being an oligarchical nation. It was established as a nation where a select few people in power made the most important decisions of their day.
It was, and always has been, a nation where disagreement with nationally-accepted policy has been repressed- sometimes by violent force. Those who sought a benevolent government whose primary function would be to ensure the safety and happiness of its citizens failed to understand the basic nature of government power.
Shortly after the Constitution was ratified, a series of events called the Whiskey Rebellion began under President George Washington in 1791. Washington’s government instituted a whiskey tax as a means of attempting to pay the federal debt. The tax has been attributed to the Federalist, Alexander Hamilton. Despite all the flowery words that Hamilton himself used under the pseudonym “Publius” (he wrote 51 of the 85 Federalist Papers), he soon began doing the opposite of what he suggested the government might do.
Rather than protecting people and ensuring their happiness, he helped created a program whereby citizens would have part of their earnings stolen from them- for it must be admitted that taxation is theft, whether it occurs with or without the consent of the taxed. Thus it was that Lysander Spooner, many decades later, declared the Constitution unfit to exist.
The American government had first abrogated the original system upon which everyone could agree- and which people ignored whenever possible. Thus it was that, in spite of their noble intentions, the leaders of the French Revolution found something unexpected when they based their new Constitution off the American version: the Constitution itself did not secure the liberty of the citizens who were expected to live under its laws. Nor was there ever any reason for any President or Congress to restrain himself by following the Constitution.
As the Whiskey Rebellion demonstrated, the power of the government to enforce its edicts came from the power of its weaponry. Without imposing the threat of violence upon citizens, no government in the world can enforce its laws. Those laws will be ignored by a citizenry that has no reason to fear their leaders.
Today, America’s traditional oligarchical society has become ever more repressive and brutal. It has discovered, as many other governments have discovered, that it is only capable of using violent force to get what it wants. The more it has to struggle to get what it wants, the more violence it uses. Those who claim that the government should follow the Constitution has missed the point entirely: laws are unwritten and arbitrary as long as the enforcers of those laws rely on firearms and ammunition to see their will be done.
For all intents and purposes, the Constitution does not exist in America. Nor does it exist in any other nation. There is, and only ever has been, a select few intimidating entire populations. As long as this is the case- and history proves that it has never been otherwise- the existence of a government should not be permitted under any circumstances. As long as government power continues to be the power of violence, it will continue making things worse and worse until it collapses from its own ponderous weight.
I’ve said before and will say again that ALL GOVERNMENTS EXIST FOR 2 PURPOSES: 1)WARS 2)CONTROL OF THE PEOPLE AND THE MONEY
By Barbara H. Peterson Farm Wars Originally published at Global Independent Analytics
If we lose our freedom by fighting for it, then we never really had it in the first place, just the illusion… I am one person. One person in a multitude. Insignificant, really, just one tree in a seemingly endless forest. Yet I can still speak. My voice has not been silenced yet. I can choose to call out the tyrants for what they are, or not. I can also choose to cower in fear of losing my freedom for simply speaking against authority. But if I choose to remain silent because of that fear, is that really freedom?
And if we remain silent in fear of losing our perceived “freedom,” isn’t that the same as giving our consent to the ones who would imprison us? So, if we live in fear of losing our freedom, is it really freedom that we lose?
What is freedom but to be unfettered by chains that bind us to false hope and traditions that teach us to bend to the will of those who would enslave and subjugate in the name of power and profit? Who use people as chattel to be tossed on the garbage heap when they no longer serve their purpose?
The illusion of freedom that we are bound with makes us compliant. Makes us complacent and honor-bound to uphold meaningless rules designed to keep us in line and safely within the illusion. And if you think that you will remain safe by following these rules, think again.
The rules change. And when they do, they have the ability to make criminals of us all.
That is how the illusion is built. Innocent until the rules change and then ignorance of those rules is no excuse. A trap. A maze with ever-changing paths with cheese placed in varying positions. No certainty, just chaos for the mice and a source of amusement for the controlling hand guiding the activities. And don’t dare bite the hand or a very, very dead mouse you will be. Labeled a danger to yourself and others. A terrorist, or whatever label necessary to invoke the proper media response, when in reality, you are merely a mouse in an unnatural environment, just trying to cope.
But the hand doesn’t care. The hand feeds and punishes at will. You exist in the maze solely for the amusement of the hand. Until you don’t. Until you displease the hand and you see your supposed freedom for what it is – a carefully constructed maze designed to keep you endlessly running in circles while spectators clap and cheer and toast to your success when you manage to grab a bite of cheese. And your every move is monitored and recorded for future reference. To make sure that you don’t get the urge to bite.
Are we really such slovenly beasts that our actions and thoughts need to be monitored continually to make sure that we are not going off-path and getting ready to conduct a mass slaughter of our fellow human beings as is promoted by the media? Or is that part of the illusion that is being portrayed as “freedom?” Do we really gain freedom by making sure that those around us cannot do us harm by placing a control grid around each person until every breath alerts authorities who determine through an algorithm whether or not we should be allowed to continue or be terminated on the spot?
That isn’t freedom. It’s the illusion.
The relief you feel by knowing that you are a law-abiding citizen of Freedom, Inc., is actually the fleeting feeling of comfort that you get when your imminent demise is put off for the moment. But not forever, because the threat is still there. It has just been deflected onto a strawman. A boogeyman. Whatever you want to call it. That temporary feeling of comfort is not real, it is smoke in the wind. An illusion. The real threat does not come from the other mice in the maze, the strawmen. This is a false threat designed to keep the mice from realizing where the true danger comes from. The real threat comes from the hand. The hand holds life and death in its palm. And it really doesn’t matter to the hand if you live or die. Become a nuisance and you die.
After all, mice are replaceable and can easily be extinguished. Until they become a horde. An uncontrollable horde of mice thinking for themselves. Mice who have found the weakness and chewed through the trappings, escaping the web of deceit and lies of illusory freedom and the grid holding it in place. A terrifying thought to the hand. Something that must be quelled. But the mice cannot be silenced for long, because once a mouse finds the escape route, another will follow, and another and another. And the lies are simply not big enough nor strong enough to contain the horde any longer.
And the illusion of freedom lies in pieces, shredded by the teeth of those it would contain. And it starts with one mouse with revolution on its mind. With freedom as a driving force in the core of its being.
The hand is not anyone’s friend. It will herd those who live on the land into reservations, then hold the land “for the people” because the people are not capable of taking care of it themselves. Illusion. It happened to the Native Americans, and now it is happening to the ranchers. Anyone who sees the subterfuge and skullduggery is a threat to the hand. Anyone who sees through the illusion.
The most successful tactic the hand has at its disposal is pitting us against each other while we all take it in the shorts. Meanwhile more land is grabbed, more rights eroded, and those fighting amongst themselves never see it coming. But those who see through the hand’s tactics will never stop. They will never stop because it makes them sick to their stomachs to be part and parcel of the biggest con of all. The very, very real illusion of freedom crafted by the hand using deceit and trickery to enslave, wielded by Freedom, Inc. in order to take total control away from the people and place it squarely in the hand of the ones who would be King.
Barbara Peterson is my webmaster-administrator, and a sharper mind or more beautiful person you will not find. I encourage all who want to have a web presence to contact her and find out how inexpensive it can really be. Every freedom loving person in America should be reading, learning and participating in the downfall of this putrid corporation that has subjected Americans to tyranny for so many, many years. If we should die or be incarcerated for demanding our original Constitutional Republic, so be it. Otherwise we will be eliminated when they no longer have a use for us. But this rogue government is not our only problem as many thousands of fools have ate the mind poison of diversity, collectivism, and socialism until they have become mere shadows of human beings. They will have to revert to freedom loving citizens or perish with the tyrants. When OBUMA, the Banking Cartel, and all tyrants like them are sitting before a common law court and listening to their death sentence, then we can reconstruct what we were promised. The new Continental States of America; under the dominion of the States Supreme Courts and have no powers other than what the Courts delegate to them. How-do-ya like them apples; tyrants? Not happy? If I were appointed as a judge you would be chained to the rear bumper of a truck and dragged over every gravel road in America.
CLICK LINK ABOVE FOR VIDEO By John Whitehead The Rutherford Institute There is a long and growing list of the kinds of speech that the government considers dangerous: hate speech, bullying speech, intolerant speech, conspiratorial speech, incendiary speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, right-wing speech, extremist speech, politically incorrect speech, etc. But if we allow the government to whittle away our First Amendment freedoms, John W. Whitehead warns, we risk turning into a society that would simultaneously be abhorrent to the founders of this country and hostile to the very words they used to birth this nation.
The American experiment was many things, but first and foremost it was an attempt, for the first time in human history, to create a society based upon the rule of law. The Declaration of Independence lists, in exhaustive and minute detail, nearly thirty enumerated cases of lawlessness on the part of King George III. This nation showed the world that common people could not only rule themselves; they could do so without an aristocracy and especially do so without an aristocracy that was, like King George, above the law.
Here’s a law: U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 101, Section 2071, Paragraph a: “Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
Paragraph b: Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.
Hillary Rodham Clinton decided to conduct, for four years, the office of Secretary of State using her own private email server. Because these emails were not transacted and recorded through the official State Department servers, Mrs. Clinton “willfully concealed and removed” these critical documents from the records and archives of the United States Government. You can further argue that by electing to not have these records placed onto government servers – which are secure, routinely backed up, and most importantly subject to Freedom Of Information Act requests, that she has, by any reasonable interpretation, “mutilated, obliterated and destroyed” these essential records, which belong not to Hillary Rodham Clinton but rather to the Secretary of State of the United States of America, and her employers, the people of that nation.
The penalty for this is a fine or up to three years imprisonment, or both. That’s paragraph (a) of the law. By her own admission, transacting ALL of her State Department business through her private server means that by not turning the entire server over to the State Department – all of it, that’s for us to decide what is important or incriminating, not her – she has in fact “willfully and unlawfully concealed, removed, mutilated, obliterated, falsified, or destroyed the same.” That too is punishable by fine, up to three years imprisonment, or both… and, parenthetically, forfeiture of office and disqualification from holding any office under the United States.
That’s the law. That’s what the law says.
The lawlessness is endemic in this administration. But beyond the lawlessness is, of course, the contempt. The contempt for the very idea that these Harvard and Yale Law School grads have to actually, you know, obey the law. The contempt for the American people’s right to know what their elected officials are doing. And beyond all of this, the towering, monumental, criminal arrogance of it: that the official business of the United States of America; the nation’s diplomacy, strategy, defense posture, privileged communications between our allies and in point of fact every particle of our nation’s foreign policy was being discussed and archived in a single box in either Texas or Manhattan or wherever the hell it is; that this server’s basic, routine, Microsoft security updates – the kind you and I get pestered with every day — were not complied with; that the vital security interests or in fact the very lives of 320 million people did not warrant the effort to even obtain a unique encryption certificate but rather used the same one issued to thousands if not millions of users; all of this gets to the heart not only of who
Hillary Clinton is and the contempt in which she holds the American people. It is deeper than that.
When the President of the United States gets an official notification from his Secretary of State from BestMattressDeals99@yahoo.com, or any email that does not end in dot gov, then he too is complicit in this lawlessness, and for the same reason.
Barack Obama’s Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, admits that the President did receive emails from his Secretary of State, and went on to say this:
Feel better now? The President of the United States, receiving emails from an illegal source, did not know or care or take any action whatsoever to ensure that she complied with the federal law she was in violation of. And neither did any of the people we pay to be responsible for the security of the communications of those at the uppermost level of the most powerful nation in the world.
This country was founded to be rid of the incompetence, reckless arrogance and casual stupidity of Kings and Queens who acted as though they were above the law. If we let these crimes go unpunished it will die of that same parasitical disease. If you google this Title and section, (“Federal Law: Title 18. Section 2071”) you will find it says exactly as stated below.
Can it be any clearer?
Former United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey tells MSNBC that not only is Hillary Clinton’s private email server illegal, it “disqualifies” her from holding any federal office.
Such as, say, President of the United States.
“If you do this or that bad thing, you’ve essentially disqualified yourself as being the leader of the free world,” said Mukasey, referring to the illegal server and the illegal handling of classified materials.
Mukasey specifically points to one federal law, Title 18. Section 2071.
For those of us who do not have United States Code committed to memory, here’s what it says:
“(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his or her office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.” Yes, it explicitly states “shall forfeit his or her office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”
Shouldn’t voters know that? The media won’t tell them. So it’s up to us. Can you help hold Hillary accountable?
Aw come on Billie, do you really think the people of this country give a shit weather or not politicians are honest? If they did, they would create a shit-storm of protests. All they give a crap about is sitting on their ass and watching some form of TV entertainment that helps their little minds solidify. The blank look of their face is a testimony to the solid space behind their eyes. Where do you think the word “hardhead” came from? As old and uneducated as I am, I managed to find and record on this site enough information to ignite the biggest revolt in the history of humanity but the stupid jerks can’t read. And if they did find out the truth about America’s government, they would not believe it. They’re useless! Hillary Clinton could pull a three foot turd out of her mouth and beat them into submission, if they accused her of anything.
Illuminism and the master plan for world domination
By: David Allen Rivera, 1994, source: darivera.com
MHP hypertext version for non-profit educational use only CFR Influence in Government, Media and Business
The pervasive influence of CFR members over all aspects of society • CFR Influence in the U.S. Government • CFR Influence in Education and the Media • CFR Affiliated Organizations and Corporations • The Brookings Institution • The Committee for Economic Development << Prev : Table of Contents : Next >> >> Follow links for timelines and related articles
CFR Influence in the U.S. Government
From 1928-72, nine out of twelve Republican Presidential nominees were CFR members. From 1952-72, CFR members were elected four out of six times. During three separate campaigns, both the Republican and Democratic nominee were, or had been a member. Since World War II, practically every Presidential candidate, with the exception of Johnson, Goldwater, and Reagan, have been members.
In Sen. Barry Goldwater’s 1979 memoir, With No Apologies, he wrote: “When a new President comes on board, there is a great turnover in personnel but no change in policy.” That’s because CFR members have held almost every key position in every Administration, from Franklin D. Roosevelt to Bill Clinton.
During that period, every Secretary of State (with the exception of Cordell Hull, James F. Byrnes, and William Rogers) has been a member. Every Secretary of Defense from the Truman Administration up to the Clinton Administration (with the exception of Melvin Laird) has been a member. Since 1920, most of the Treasury Secretaries have been members; and since the Eisenhower Administration, nearly all of the National Security Advisors have been members. Curtis Dall wrote in his book, FDR: My Exploited Father-in-Law:
“For a long time I felt that FDR had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit this country, the USA. But, he didn’t. Most of his thoughts, his political ‘ammunition’ as it were, were carefully manufactured for him in advance by the CFR / One World money group.”
NATO Commanders The position of Supreme Allied Commander of NATO has usually been held by CFR members, including:
• Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower • Gen. Matthew B. Ridgeway • Gen. Alfred M. Groenther • Gen. Lauris Norstad • Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer • Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster • Gen. Alexander M. Haig, Jr.
Most of the superintendents at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point have been CFR members. Harry S. Truman Administration • Dean Acheson (Secretary of State) • Robert Lovett (Secretary of State and later Secretary of Defense) • W. Averell Harriman (Marshall Plan Administrator) • John J. McCloy (High Commissioner to Germany) • George Kennan (State Department advisor) • Charles Bohlen (State Department advisor). Dwight Eisenhower Administration
When CFR member Dwight Eisenhower became President, he appointed six CFR members to his Cabinet, and twelve to positions of ‘Under Secretary’: • John Foster Dulles (Secretary of State, an in-law to the Rockefellers who was a founding member of the CFR, past Chairman of the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace) • Allen Dulles (head of the OSS operation in Switzerland during World War II, who became Director of the CIA and President of the CFR) • Robert B. Anderson (Secretary of the Treasury) • Lewis Strauss (Secretary of Commerce)
John F. Kennedy Administration
When CFR member John F. Kennedy became President, 63 of the 82 names on his list of prospective State Department officials were CFR members. John Kenneth Galbraith said: “Those of us who had worked for the Kennedy election were tolerated in the government for that reason and had a say, but foreign policy was still with the Council on Foreign Relations people.” Among the more notable members in his Administration: • Dean Rusk (Secretary of State) • C. Douglas Dillon (Secretary of the Treasury) • Adlai Stevenson (U.N. Ambassador) • John McCone (CIA Director) • W. Averell Harriman (Ambassador-at-Large) • John J. McCloy (Disarmament Administrator) • Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) • John Kenneth Galbraith (Ambassador to India) • Edward R. Murrow (head of the U.S. Information Agency) • Arthur H. Dean (head of the U.S. Delegation to the Geneva Disarmament Conference) • Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. (Special White House Assistant and noted historian) • Thomas K. Finletter (Ambassador to NATO and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) • George Ball (Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs) • McGeorge Bundy (Special Assistant for National Security who went on to head the Ford Foundation) • Robert McNamara (Secretary of Defense) • Robert F. Kennedy (Attorney General) • Paul H. Nitze (Assistant Secretary of Defense) • Charles E. Bohlen (Assistant Secretary of State) • Walt W. Rostow (Deputy National Security Advisor) • Roswell Gilpatrick (Deputy Secretary of Defense) • Henry Fowler (Under Secretary of State) • Jerome Wiesner (Special Assistant to the President) • Angier Duke (Chief of Protocol). Lyndon B. Johnson Administration • Roswell Gilpatrick (Deputy Secretary of Defense) • Walt W. Rostow (Special Assistant to the President) • Hubert H. Humphrey (Vice-President) • Dean Rusk (Secretary of State) • Henry Fowler (Secretary of the Treasury) • George Ball (Under Secretary of State) • Robert McNamara(Secretary of Defense) • Paul H. Nitze (Deputy Secretary of Defense) • Alexander B. Trowbridge (Secretary of Commerce) • William McChesney Martin (Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board) • Gen. Maxwell D. Taylor (Chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Board)
Richard M. Nixon Administration Nixon appointed over 100 CFR members to serve in his Administration, including: • George Ball (Foreign Policy Consultant to the State Department) • Dr. Harold Brown (General Advisory Committee of the U.S. Committee of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and the senior member of the U.S. delegation for SALT talks with Russia) • Dr. Arthur Burns (Chairman of the Federal Reserve) • C. Fred Bergsten (Operations Staff of the National Security Council) • C. Douglas Dillon (General Advisory Committee of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency) • Richard N. Cooper (Operations Staff of the National Security Council) • Gen. Andrew I. Goodpaster (Supreme Allied Commander in Europe) • John W. Gardner (Board of Directors, National Center for Volunteer Action) • Elliot L. Richardson (Under Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General; and Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) • David Rockefeller (Task Force on International Development) • Nelson A. Rockefeller (head of the Presidential Mission to Ascertain the Views of Leaders in the Latin America Countries) • Rodman Rockefeller (Member of the Advisory Council for Minority Enterprise) • Dean Rusk (General Advisory Committee of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency) • Gerald Smith (Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency) • Cyrus Vance (General Advisory Committee of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency) • Richard Gardner (member of the Commission on International Trade and Investment Policy) • Sen. Jacob K. Javits (Representative to the 24th Session of the General Assembly of the U.N.) • Henry A. Kissinger (Secretary of State and Harvard professor who was Rockefeller’s personal adviser on foreign affairs openly advocating a “New World Order”) • Henry Cabot Lodge (Chief Negotiator of the Paris Peace Talks [Vietnam war]) • Douglas MacArthur II (Ambassador to Iran) • John J. McCloy (Chairman of the General Advisory Committee of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency) • Paul H. Nitze (senior member of the U.S. delegation for the talks with Russia on SALT) • John Hay Whitney (member of the Board of Directors for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting) • George P. Shultz (Secretary of the Treasury) • William Simon (Secretary of Treasury) • Stanley R. Resor (Secretary of the Army) • William E. Colby (Director of the CIA) • Peter G. Peterson (Secretary of Commerce) • James Lynn (Housing Secretary) • Paul McCracken (chief economic aide) • Charles Yost (U.N. Ambassador) • Harlan Cleveland (NATO Ambassador) • Jacob Beam (USSR Ambassador) • David Kennedy (Secretary of Treasury). Gerald R. Ford Administration When CFR member Gerald Ford became President, among some of the other CFR members: • William Simon (Secretary of Treasury) • Nelson Rockefeller (Vice-President)
Jimmy Carter Administration
President Carter (who became a CFR member in 1983) appointed over 60 CFR members to serve in his Administration: • Walter Mondale (Vice-President) • Zbigniew Brzezinski (National Security Advisor) • Cyrus R. Vance (Secretary of State) • W. Michael Blumenthal (Secretary of Treasury) • Harold Brown (Secretary of Defense) • Stansfield Turner (Director of the CIA) • Gen. David Jones (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) Ronald Reagan Administration There were 75 CFR and Trilateral Commission members under President Reagan: • Alexander Haig (Secretary of State) • George Shultz (Secretary of State) • Donald Regan (Secretary of Treasury) • William Casey (CIA Director) • Malcolm Baldridge (Secretary of Commerce) • Jeanne J. Kirkpatrick (U.N. Ambassador) • Frank C. Carlucci (Deputy Secretary of Defense) • William E. Brock (Special Trade Representative) George H. W. Bush Administration During his 1964 campaign for the U.S. Senate in Texas, George Bush said: “If Red China should be admitted to the U.N., then the U.N. is hopeless and we should withdraw.” In 1970, as Ambassador to the U.N., he pushed for Red China to be seated in the General Assembly. When Bush was elected, the CFR member became the first President to publicly mention the “New World Order” and had in his Administration nearly 350 CFR and Trilateral Commission members: • Brent Scowcroft (National Security Advisor) • Richard B. Cheney (Secretary of Defense) • Colin L. Powell (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) • William Webster (Director of the CIA) • Richard Thornburgh (Attorney General) • Nicholas F. Brady (Secretary of Treasury) • Lawrence S. Eagleburger (Deputy Secretary of State) • Horace G. Dawson, Jr. (U.S. Information Agency and Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights) • Alan Greenspan (Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board)
Bill Clinton Administration When CFR member Bill Clinton was elected, Newsweek magazine would later refer to him as the “New Age President.” In October, 1993, Richard Harwood, a Washington Post writer, in describing the Clinton Administration, said its CFR membership was “the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States”. • Albert Gore, Jr. (Vice-President) • Donna E. Shalala (Secretary of Health and Human Services) • Laura D. Tyson (Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors) • Alice M. Rivlin (Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget) • Madeline K. Albright (U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.) • Warren Christopher (Secretary of State) • Clifton R. Wharton, Jr. (Deputy Secretary of State and former Chairman of the Rockefeller Foundation) • Les Aspin (Secretary of Defense) • Colin Powell (Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff) • W. Anthony Lake (National Security Advisor) • George Stephanopoulos (Senior Advisor) • Samuel R. ‘Sandy’ Berger (Deputy National Security Advisor) • R. James Woolsey (CIA Director) • William J. Crowe, Jr. (Chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board) • Lloyd Bentsen (former member, Secretary of Treasury) • Roger C. Altman (Deputy Secretary of Treasury) • Henry G. Cisneros (Secretary of Housing and Urban Development) • Bruce Babbit (Secretary of the Interior) • Peter Tarnoff (Under Secretary of State for International Security of Affairs) • Winston Lord (Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs) • Strobe Talbott (Aid Coordinator to the Commonwealth of Independent States) • Alan Greenspan (Chairman of the Federal Reserve System) • Walter Mondale (U.S. Ambassador to Japan) • Ronald H. Brown (Secretary of Commerce) • Franklin D. Raines (Economics and International Trade).
George W. Bush Administration • Richard Cheney (Vice President, former Secretary of Defense under President G.H.W. Bush) • Colin Powell (Secretary of State, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Presidents Bush and Clinton) • Condoleeza Rice (National Security Advisor, former member of President Bush’s National Security Council) • Robert B. Zoellick (U.S. Trade Representative, former Under Secretary of State in the Bush administration) • Elaine Chao (Secretary of Labor) • Brent Scowcroft (Chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, former National Security Advisor to President Bush) • Richard Haass (Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Ambassador at Large) • Henry Kissinger (Pentagon Defense Policy Board, former Secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and Ford) • Robert Blackwill (U.S. Ambassador to India, former member of President Bush’s National Security Council) • Stephen Friedman (Sr. White House Economic Advisor) • Stephen Hadley (Deputy National Security Advisor, former Assistant Secretary of Defense under Cheney) • Richard Perle (Chairman of Pentagon Defense Policy Board, former Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Reagan administration) • Paul Wolfowitz (Assistant Secretary of Defense, former Assistant Secretary of State in the Reagan administration and former Under Secretary of Defense in the Bush administration) • Dov S. Zakheim (Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, former Under Secretary of Defense in the Reagan administration) • I. Lewis Libby (Chief of Staff for the Vice President, former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense). The Christian Science Monitor said that “almost half of the Council members have been invited to assume official government positions or to act as consultants at one time or another.” (page top)
CFR Influence in Education and the Media The Council accepts only American citizens, and has a membership of about 3,600, including influential bankers, corporate officers, and leading government officials who have been significantly affecting domestic and foreign policy for the past 30 years. Every [recent] member had been handpicked by David Rockefeller, who heads the inner circle of the CFR.
Some of the CFR directors have been: • Walter Lippman (1932-37) • Adlai Stevenson (1958-62) • Cyrus Vance (1968-76, 1981-87) • Zbigniew Brzezinski (1972-77) • Robert O. Anderson (1974-80) • Paul Volcker (1975-79) • Theodore M. Hesburgh (1926-85) • Lane Kirkland (1976-86) • George H.W. Bush (1977-79) • Henry Kissinger (1977-81) • David Rockefeller (1949-85) • George Shultz (1980-88) • Alan Greenspan (1982-88) • Brent Scowcroft (1983-89) • Jeanne J. Kirkpatrick (1985- ) • Warren M. Christopher (1982-91) • Richard Cheney (1987-89)
Some of the College Presidents that have been CFR members: • Michael I. Sovern (Columbia University) • Frank H. T. Rhodes (Cornell University) • John Brademus (New York University) • Alice S. Ilchman (Sarah Lawrence College) • Theodore M. Hesburgh (Notre Dame University) • Donald Kennedy (Stanford University) • Benno J. Schmidt, Jr. (Yale University) • Hanna Holborn Gray (University of Chicago) • Stephen Muller (Johns Hopkins University) • Howard R. Swearer (Brown University) • Donna E. Shalala (University of Wisconsin) • John P. Wilson (Washington and Lee University). Among the members of the media who have been in the CFR: • William Paley (CBS) • Dan Rather (CBS) • Harry Reasoner (CBS) • Roone Arledge (ABC) • Bill Moyers (NBC) • Tom Brokaw (NBC) • John Chancellor (NBC) • Marvin Kalb (CBS) • Irving Levine • David Brinkley (ABC) • John Scali • Barbara Walters (ABC) • William Buckley (PBS, National Review) • George Stephanopoulos • Daniel Schorr (CBS) • Robert McNeil (PBS) • Jim Lehrer (PBS) • Diane Sawyer • Hodding Carter III
Some of the major newspapers, news services and media groups that have been controlled or influenced by the CFR: • New York Times (Sulzbergers, James Reston, Max Frankel, Harrison Salisbury) • Washington Post (Frederick S. Beebe, Katherine Graham, Osborne Elliott) • Wall Street Journal • Boston Globe • Baltimore Sun • Chicago Sun-Times • L.A. Times Syndicate • Houston Post • Minneapolis Star-Tribune • Arkansas Gazette • Des Moines Register and Tribune • Louisville Courier • Associated Press • United Press International • Reuters News Service • Gannett Co. (publisher of USA Today and 90 other daily papers plus 40 weeklies; and also owns 15 radio stations, 8 TV stations, and 40,000 billboards).
In 1896, Aldolph Ochs bought the New York Times, with the financial backing of J.P. Morgan (CFR), August Belmont (Rothschild agent), and Jacob Schiff (of Kuhn, Loeb and Co.). It later passed to the control of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, who was also a CFR member. Eugene Meyer, a CFR member, bought the Washington Post in 1933. [It was later] run by his daughter, Katherine Graham, also a member of the CFR.
Some of the magazines that have been controlled or influenced by the CFR: • Time, Inc. founded by CFR member Henry Luce and Hedley Donovan, which publishes Time, Fortune, Life, Money, People, Entertainment Weekly, and Sports Illustrated • Newsweek (owned by the Washington Post, W. Averell Harriman, Roland Harriman, and Lewis W. Douglas) • Business Week • U.S. News and World Report • Saturday Review • National Review • Reader’s Digest • Atlantic Monthly • McCall’s • Forbes • Look • Harper’s Magazine
Some of the publishers that have been controlled or influenced by the CFR: • Macmillan • Random House • Simon & Schuster • McGraw-Hill • Harper Brothers • Harper & Row • Yale University Press • Little Brown & Co. • Viking Press • Cowles Publishing. (page top)
CFR Affiliated Organizations and Corporations G. Gordon Liddy, former Nixon staffer, who later became a talk show pundit, laughed off the idea of a “New World Order”, saying that there are so many different organizations working toward their own goals of a one-world government, that they cancel each other out. Not the case. You have seen that their tentacles are very far reaching, as far as the government and the media. However, as outlined below, you will see that the CFR has a heavy cross membership with many groups; as well as a cross membership among the directorship of many corporate boards, and this is a good indication that their efforts are concerted.
Some of the organizations and think-tanks that have been controlled or influenced by the CFR: • Brookings Institute • RAND Corporation • American Assembly • Foreign Policy Association (co-founded by CFR member Raymond Fosdick) • World Affairs Council • Business Advisory Council • Committee for Economic Development • National Foreign Trade Council • National Bureau of Economic Research • National Association of Manufacturers • National Industrial Conference Board • Americans for Democratic Action • Hudson Institute • Carnegie Endowment for International Peace • Institute for Defense Analysis • World Peace Foundation • United Nations Association • National Planning Association • Center for Inter-American Relations • Free Europe Committee • Atlantic Council of the U.S. (founded in 1961 by CFR member Christian Herter) • Council for Latin America • National Committee on U.S.-China Relations • African-American Institute • Middle East Institute
Some of the many companies that have been controlled or influenced by the CFR: • Morgan, Stanley • Kuhn, Loeb • Lehman Brothers • Bank of America • Chase Manhattan Bank • J. P. Morgan and Co. • First National City Bank • Brown Brothers, Harriman and Co. • Bank of New York • CitiBank/Citicorp • Chemical Bank • Bankers Trust of New York • Manufacturers Hanover • Morgan Guaranty • Merrill Lynch • Equitable Life • New York Life • Metropolitan Life • Mutual of New York • Prudential Insurance • Phillips Petroleum • Chevron • Exxon • Mobil • Atlantic-Richfield (Arco) • Texaco • IBM • Xerox Corporation • AT&T • General Electric • ITT Corporation • Dow Chemical • E. I. du Pont • BMW of North America • Mitsubishi • Toyota Motor Corporation • General Motors • Ford Motor Company • Chrysler • U.S. Steel • Proctor and Gamble • Johnson and Johnson • Estee Lauder • Avon Products • R. J. R. Nabisco • R. H. Macy • Federated Department Stores • Gimbel Brothers • J. C. Penney Company • Sears, Roebuck and Company • May Department Stores • Allied Stores • American Express • PepsiCo • Coca Cola • Pfizer • Bristol-Myers Squibb • Hilton Hotels • American Airlines
In September, 1922, when the CFR began publishing its quarterly magazine, Foreign Affairs, the editorial stated that its purpose was “to guide American opinion.” By 1924, it had “established itself as the most authoritative American review dealing with international relations.” This highly influential magazine has been the leading publication of its kind, and has a circulation of over 75,000. Reading this publication can be highly informative as to the views of its members. For instance, the Spring, 1991 issue, called for a U.N. standing army, consisting of military personnel from all the member nations, directly under the control of the U.N. Security Council.
A major source of their funding (since 1953), stems from providing a “corporate service” to over 100 companies for a minimum fee of $1,000, that furnishes subscribers with inside information on what is going on politically and financially, both internationally and domestically; by providing free consultation, use of their extensive library, a subscription to Foreign Affairs, and by holding seminars on reports and research done for the Executive branch. They also publish books and pamphlets, and have regular dinner meetings to allow speakers and members to present positions, award study fellowships to scholars, promote regional meetings and stage round-table discussion meetings.
Since the Council on Foreign Relations has been able to infiltrate our government, it is no wonder that our country has been traveling on the course that it has. The moral, educational and financial decline of this nation has been no accident. It has been due to a carefully contrived plot on behalf of these conspirators, who will be satisfied with nothing less than a one-world government. And it is coming to that. As each year goes by, the momentum is picking up, and it is becoming increasingly clear, what road our government is taking. The proponents of one-world government are becoming less secretive, as evidenced by George Bush’s talk of a “New World Order.” The reason for that is that they feel it is too late for their plans to be stopped. They have become so entrenched in our government, our financial structure, and our commerce, that they probably do control this country, if not the world. In light of this, it seems that it will be only a matter of time before their plans are fully implemented. (page top)
The Brookings Institution The Brookings Institution was established by St. Louis tycoon and philanthropist, Robert Somers Brookings (1850-1932). At the age of 21, Brookings had become a partner in Cupples and Marston (a manufacturer of woodenware and cordage), which, ten years later, under his leadership, expanded and flourished. In 1896, at the age of 46, he retired to devote his duties towards higher education, and became President of Washington University’s Board of Trustees, which, through the next twenty years, turned into a major university.
He was one of the original Trustees of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and a consultant to the Commission on Economy and Efficiency during the Taft Administration. In 1917, he was appointed to President Wilson’s War Industries Board which had the responsibility of receiving and distributing the supplies needed by the military, later becoming Chairman of its Price Fixing Committee responsible for negotiating prices for all goods purchased by the Allied governments, which gave him a key role in the Wilson Administration.
At the age of 70, he took over the leadership of the Institute for Government Research (IGR), founded by lawyer and economist Frederick A. Cleveland in 1916, and raised $750,000 from 92 corporations and a dozen private citizens to get it moving. Their first project was to push for legislation creating a federal budget, which was successful. The first U.S. Budget Director, under President Harding, was Charles G. Dawes, who relied heavily on the IGR’s staff. The Institute was also involved in civil service reform legislation in the 1920’s. Among their members: Supreme Court Chief Justice William Howard Taft (who was Chief Justice from 1921-30, after his Presidential term), Herbert Hoover (President, 1929-32), and Elihu Root.
Brookings decided that economics was the biggest issue, and not the administrative aspects that the Institute was covering, so in June, 1922, with a $1,650,000 grant from the Carnegie Corporation, he established the Institute of Economics to represent the interests of the labor unions and the general public. In 1924, he established the Robert S. Brookings School of Economics and Government (an outgrowth of Washington University in St. Louis), to allow doctoral students to spend time in Washington, D.C. to work on the staffs of the IGR and the Institute of Economics.
In 1927, he merged all three organizations to form the Brookings Institution, whose purpose was to train future government officials. He put $6 million, and 36 years of his life, into the nonpartisan, nonprofit center, which analyze government problems, and issue statistical reports. They produce an annual report, Setting National Priorities, which analyzes the President’s budget.
Their headquarters is an eight story building, eight blocks from the White House, at 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW. They have a staff of about 250, including about 45 senior fellows and 19 research associates. Salaries go as high a $40,000 a year. After serving close to ten years in the State Department, Leo Pasvolsky returned to the Brookings Institution in 1946, along with six other members of the State Department. With the financial backing of the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, and the Mellon Trust, Pasvolsky initiated an International Studies Group which developed the basis for the Marshall Plan to aid the European war recovery efforts.
In 1951, the Chicago Tribune said that the Brookings Institution had created an “elaborate program of training and indoctrination in global thinking,” and that most of its scholars wind up as policy makers in the State Department. Truman was the first President to turn to them for help. In 1941, he named Brookings Vice President Edwin Nouse as the first Chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors. Kennedy and Johnson appointed many of their members to key posts. Carter’s foreign policy became a resting place for the many of the group’s recommendations.
President Johnson said that the purpose of his ‘Great Society’ legislation was to “try to take all of the money that we think is unnecessarily being spent and take it from the ‘haves’ and give it to the ‘have-nots’ that need it so much.” Ralph Epperson, author of The Unseen Hand, one of the best books about the Master Conspiracy, said that Johnson was a “closet Communist.” Another well-known researcher, John Coleman, said that the Brookings Institution had developed and drafted the Great Society programs which were
“in every detail, simply lifted from Fabian Socialist papers drawn up in England. In some instances, Brookings did not even bother to change the titles of the Fabian Society papers. Once such instance was using ‘Great Society,’ which was taken directly from a Fabian Socialist paper from the same title.”
After Socialist leader Eugene Debs died in 1926, Socialist Norman Thomas, who graduated from and was ordained by the Union Theological Seminary, became the leader of the Socialist Party, running for President six times. Thomas was happy with Johnson’s vision and said: “I ought to rejoice and I do. I rub my eyes in amazement and surprise. His war on poverty is a Socialistic approach…”
Republicans regard the Brookings Institution as the “Democratic government-in-exile,” yet, Nixon appointed Herbert Stein, a Brookings scholar, to be Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors. The Nixon Administration, who at one time had considered bombing the Brookings Institution in order to allow the FBI to seize their documents, had considered the idea of a “Brookings Institution for Republicans” to offset the liberalism of Brookings. They thought of calling it the Institute for an Informed America, or the Silent Majority Institute. E. Howard Hunt, of Watergate fame, was to be its first Director, but he wanted to turn it into a center for covert political activity.
The role of the “conservative Brookings” was taken by an existing research center called the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, which was founded in 1943 by Louis H. Brown (Chairman of the Board at Johns-Manville Corporation), to promote free enterprise ideas. During the early sixties, they shortened their name to the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and later received a lot of financial support during the Nixon and Ford Administrations, when the organization became a pool from which they drew their advisors. When Carter was elected, the AEI became a haven for many Republican officials, including President Gerald Ford, and William E. Simon, the Secretary of Treasury.
The Committee for Economic Development In 1941, Paul Gray Hoffman, President of the Studebaker Company and a Trustee of the University of Chicago, along with Robert Maynard Hutchins and William Benton, the University’s President and Vice President, organized the American Policy Commission to apply the work of the University’s scholars and economists to government policy. They later merged with an organization established in 1939 by Fortune magazine called the Fortune Round Table.
Starting out as a group of business, labor, agricultural, and religious leaders, they soon evolved into an Establishment organization, with such members as: Ralph McCabe (head of Scott Paper Co.), Henry Luce (Editor-in-Chief and co-founder of Time, Life, and Fortune magazines), Ralph Flanders (a Boston banker), Marshall Field (Chicago newspaper publisher), Clarence Francis (head of General Foods), Ray Rubicam (an advertising representative), and Beardsley Ruml (treasurer of Macy’s Department Store in New York City, former Dean of Social Sciences at the University of Chicago, and Chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, whose idea it was to deduct taxes from your paycheck).
At the beginning of World War II, Hoffman and Benton approached Jesse Jones, the Secretary of Commerce, with an idea for an ‘American Policy Commission’ to “analyze, criticize, and challenge the thinking and policies of business, labor, agriculture, and government,” which Jones accepted and began to organize with their help. On September 3, 1942, the Committee for Economic Development (CED) was incorporated in Washington, D.C. (2000 L Street NW, Suite 700) to: “…foster, promote, conduct, encourage, and finance scientific research, education, training, and publication in the broad field of economics in order that industry and commerce may be in a position, in the postwar period, to make their full contribution to high and secure standards of living for people in all walks of life through maximum employment and high productivity in our domestic economy; to promote and carry out these objects, purposes, and principles in a free society without regard to, and independently of the special interests of any group in the body politic, either political, social, or economic.”
Basically, their work centered around how to prepare the U.S. economy for a smooth transition from a wartime to a peacetime environment without the occurrence of a major depression or recession. A 1944 CED Report, International Trade and Domestic Employment, by Duke University Professor Calvin B. Hoover, helped push the United States into the International Monetary Fund, which was laid out at the Bretton Woods Conference in June, 1944, by chief negotiators Harry Dexter White (of the CFR) and John Maynard Keynes (of the Fabian Society); and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank), which both became part of the United Nations. It also helped motivate Establishment backing for what later emerged as the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs. About three years later, their report on An American Program of European Economic Cooperation was eventually developed into the strategy for European recovery that became part of the Marshall Plan. In fact, Hoffman, who became the first CED Chairman, later headed the Federal agency that administered the Marshall Plan.
After the War, while Hoover was on leave from Duke University, he worked with Hoffman to develop what eventually became known as the Marshall Plan. The group’s later work laid the groundwork for regional government in the United States.
This old man does not deserve to speak above the intellect of the men quoted below.
“Before a standing army can rule; the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.” ~Noah Webster
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” — C. S. Lewis (1898-1963), British novelist Source: “God in the Dock” (1948)
CRUDEN v. NEALE 2N.C. (1796) 2 SE 70 “Every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent”
“The duty of a Patriot is to protect his country from its government.” Thomas Paine
“No earthly government has jurisdiction over your God Given Rights.” HENCE, – NO GOD – NO RIGHTS!
Comments Off on Final Warning A History of the New World Order
At a European Parliament meeting in 2013, this MEP stunned the room into silence as he explained the truth about the whole banking system…
You may not be interested in politics and finance, but let us assure you: it matters. Perhaps what matters more than conventional rhetoric on how the ‘system’ runs, however, is the truth explained above and summarized below. The video above is from a European Parliament meeting in 2013, in which a courageous MEP explained to the whole room why everything they know about the whole banking system is a scam.
You don’t need us to tell you that this guy deserves a round of applause for his honesty. Such is rare in politics. In addition, the importance of what he shared cannot be overstated.
Whether you’re aware of it or not, money is an arbitrary invention to profit from debt. Banks and governments encourage individuals and countries to be in debt because the greater the debt, the more money they pocket. However, they don’t make money from the interest, but from something called the Fractional Reserve Banking system. This scam creates money out of thin air and brings in a profit of hundreds or even thousands of percent on all debts. This ‘undeclared’ money makes a few people very rich.
The Real Secret explains that once you – or a country – enters into debt, you are a slave to be exploited and raped by the system. This is why millions are spent tricking individuals and countries to spend more – regardless of the consequences. Sometimes it seems easier to feign ignorance and continue buying your $7 mocha lattes on credit, drive a car you don’t really own, and pay for school you’re not sure will ever result in a job… But it’s not.
What’s more difficult than waking up is living blind, as a slave. It is important to realize that every choice you makes affects the whole of humanity.
In this moment, you have a choice to make; the repercussions will not only affect you but future generations. Think about it.
What a damn shame there is no one like this guy in American Politics! What does that say for all you dopes’ that still vote? Are you still not aware that you are voting for the officers of the most corrupt Corporation in the world? Corporate Officers who only owe their allegiance to the Central Bankers, and don’t give a crap about us!
Comments Off on Watch A Rare Moment Of Truth As MEP Explains Why The Whole Banking System Is A Scam
by James Corbett TheInternationalForecaster.com February 23, 2016
Quick: what’s the first thing you remember about the climate conference in Paris last December? The weather astrologers’ absurd resolution to control the amount of temperature rise the world will experience over the next century?
Politicians grandstanding on the freshly-dead victims of their latest false flag to proclaim that their global warming nonsense was a “powerful rebuke” to their proxy terror army in Syria? The predictable (but no less retch-inducing) hypocrisy of the jetset glitterati descending on Paris in their private jets and limousine fleets to dine on banquet lunches from Micheline-starred chefs before lecturing humanity on how we’ll all have to tighten our belts for the new climate austerity?
Of course that’s what you remember. Because that’s what you’re expected to remember. As long as you never peek under the hood, never lift the lid to check what’s inside the COP21 documents, they’re perfectly happy for the usual drivel about saving the planet to be printed in the mainstream press. They’re perfectly happy for the progressive press to print the usual nonsense lamenting the fact that there isn’t a strong enough global government to save us from the weather demons. They’re even happy for the dissenters to debunk the flawed science and point out the hypocrisies and lambaste the silly political statements because all of these things miss the heart of the issue.
The heart of the issue (for those who need it elaborated) is this: the future of $90 trillion of energy infrastructure investments and the $1 trillion green bond market and the multi-trillion dollar carbon trading market and the $391 billion (and growing) climate finance industry hangs in the balance.
Of course it does. What else explains the convergence of interest in the organizations, structures and mechanisms for global governance that the magical global thermostat narrative affords? It’s why Enron and Goldman Sachs pioneered the emissions trading swindles (that–surprise, surprise!–are a complete and total fraud from top to bottom).
It’s why General Electric, DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, Pepsi, Siemens, AIG and a host of other Fortune 500/CFR companies joined BP, ConocoPhillips, GM and a host of other oiligarch companies as founding members of the US Climate Action Partnership whose “Blueprint for Legislative Action” became the backbone of the Wall Street-backed Waxman-Markey bill of 2009.
It’s why the Rockefellers and Rothschilds are at the forefront of the climate hysteria. It’s why over 400 global institutional investors worth over $25 trillion have decided to cash in on the bonanza with their “Investment Platform for Climate Actions.”
Heck, it’s why EDF, Engie, Air France, Renault, BNP Paribas and a host of other oiligarch companies footed 20% of the bill for the Paris conference itself (and why the French government bent over backwards to point out their “green” credentials). Take just one structural element of the climate swindle: the Green Climate Fund. Never heard of it? Hardly surprising. It’s just the facility through which the UN is expected to be clearing $100 billion in climate funding per year by the end of the decade. That’s right: $100 billion per year. Every year.
The Fund was established at the 2010 edition of the UN Climate Conference (COP16) in Mexico in order “to support concrete mitigation actions by developing countries that are implemented in a transparent way,” which is UN Newspeak for “create a bottomless trough of pork for corrupt kleptocrats, bureaucrats, kakistocrats and tyrants to siphon off before funneling some loose change into some makework projects.” And it brags that it represents “a new and equitable form of global governance to respond to the global challenge of climate change” which you hardly need the globalist decoder to figure out. The Fund is headquartered in the Songdo Business District of Incheon, South Korea, because the Korean Secretary-General of the UN and the Korean President of the World Bank probably just threw darts at a map (since, as we all know, blatant political nepotism never happens at those institutions).
Even the Fund’s biggest supporters are criticizing the “transparent way” it is handling its first disbursement. The Fund claims it consulted indigenous communities before approving $6.2 million for a Peruvian wetlands resilience programme, but there is no verification that this ever took place. Worse, details of the projects it has decided to fund so far have not been publicly released, only proposal documents (and in two cases, only a summary).
But for those who still believe this money is being handled by angels with nothing but the best interests of humanity in mind, note this passage from the Nature article on the Fund’s shadiness: “For some, another contentious issue is that the GCF is flowing its money mainly through international organizations, such as multilateral or private banks such as the World Bank and Deutsche Bank — rather than sending it directly to institutions in developing countries where the projects are taking place.”
For some? You mean, for people with their head screwed on straight? Oh, and the kicker? The Fund’s Executive Director just happens to be an ex-Citibank investment banker. Who woulda thunk it? Yes, the global climate swindle is well under way, brought to you by the same trustworthy folks in the banking industry and in the Fortune 500 / CFR / globalist jetset who have been steering us into the happy economic, political and environmental conditions that we enjoy today… …oh, wait…
…but it’s a different kind of green
If there’s any bright spot in all of this it’s that so far the Fund has only managed to raise just over $10 billion in pledges from the developed countries. And even that is an inflated number which includes the $3 billion which Obama made a big show of pledging in 2014 but so far hasn’t actually delivered. It’s a long way to go to get to that $100 billion/year mark they’re hoping to reach by 2020.
Don’t feel too sorry for the globalists, though. Their game is a war of attrition, and as long as people continue to buy into the narrative that all of this money is going to help the poor and downtrodden (by way of the UN and the World Bank and their corporate crony Wall Street financial institutions) then it’s only a matter of time before this thin edge of climate cronyism turns into the full wedge of global kleptocracy.
Comments Off on And Now For The 100 Trillion Dollar Bankster Climate Swindle…
Dear Mr. Roberts, I check out your website at least twice each week. It is always most informative. Thank you. Where I live down here in far-southern Illinois the unemployment rate is upwards of sixty to eighty percent. Most individuals and families rely on food stamps or some combination of government aid.
No doubt if these were taken away you would have riots in the streets. Surroundings towns are mostly destitute, with very little local commerce to speak of other than the occasional corporate franchise store ( mini-WallMarts). Seventy five years ago and with ten times the population this region was thriving economically, flourishing mostly on local river traffic and small family farming, with the varied supporting commerce that was dependent on and as an outgrowth of these two basic economic activities. The very same rich and abundant natural resources that existed then exist today but now everything is mostly under the control of outside corporate interests that extract most of the wealth from the region.
Today nearly every town is only a shadow of its former self and nearly all farms are large corporate enterprises that employ very few locals. I, for one, have to drive miles just to visit a good grocery store when my own town has blocks of abandoned store fronts and a deteriorating infrastructure. You have to wonder what is happening to our country when most rural regions today seem to be turning into third-world backwaters devoid of any life and real meaning. It seems all of our nation’s wealth is now concentrating in a few wealthy regions and everywhere else is merely becoming sacrifice zones for ”extraction” and ”mining” to support the investor elites.
Dear Fred, You should take a tour around America so you would not feel alone. This has been the Banking Cartels modus operandi for many years, and rural America has been confiscated by them to herd the people into government supported stack and pack cities so every one becomes dependent on the government hand outs which will disappear when they are finished redesigning America. This was only possible because the people were side tracked by the good life and never learned that politicians were not put in office by the people, they are appointed by the Bankers, “bought and paid for traitors“.
The next time you come close to a politician, knock his teeth out. Americans have become so controlled that only a massive educated populace will have the understanding to make demands for our return to a republic. In reality, if we do not produce a hundred million educated Americans who are willing to defy the powerful International Investment Banking Cartel, we will become a Nation of slaves. It is past time forAmericans to wake up to the truth, learn it, and revise their commentary to fight it with all their might. This means educate the sheep non stop until they are as outraged as we all should be.
We need to get this information out to a hundred million people ASAP. Why would an entire Nation accept a Corporation for a government? There is only one way for things to change for the better, and that is for a hundred million people to read this: You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause (Paperback) by Judge Anna Maria Riezinger & James Clinton Belcher
George Washington takes the oath of office at Federal Hall in lower Manhattan, April 30, 1789.
On September 17, 1787 George Washington was the first to sign and accept the Constitution even though it had no Bill of Rights. It was Patrick Henry with his great speeches and lectures who in 1788 forced an agreement which promised that continued ratifica- tions of the document depended upon a Bill of Rights to be forthcoming. In 1789 Washing- ton took office and was faced with the arduous task of pioneering the first presidency including the structuring of the militia system. By January 1790 the influence Patrick Henry had over him became quite apparent. When Washington chaired the 1787 Constitutional Convention, provi- sions had been made for the defense of the country against invasion and for stifling rebel- lions, but there was an insuf- ficiency of safeguards to be applied against tyranny brought on by public officials.
14 United State Governors : Prepare State Militia Defenses, To Be Ready Against Obama’s Rogue Federal Forces! By 1790 Washington began work on his “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia.” By now he was more able to see the weaknesses in the Constitution. He openly discussed the threat of tyranny emanating from within the government. By then, Patrick Henry’s wisdom was spread throughout the 13 original states, and it was inculcated as the basis for the policies and functions of the militia. Henry perpetuated the people’s liberty. He sustained the ultimate authority of the people. Washington well under- stood the need to safeguard the nation from its foreign enemies. In his “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia” he undertook to warn about the dangers of domestic enemies: tyranny in government. Washington himself took the farmers out for practice, and he utilized the knowledge and experiences of his generals and other valuable officers in the War for Independence by having them instruct and train the citizens (the whole people) in the techniques of soldiering, and the maintenance of an ‘energetic national militia’.
His “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia” was communicated to the Senate, on the 21st of January 1790. This lengthy Plan was permeated with the proposition that it is the direct duty and responsibility of the people themselves to guard against tyranny from within government. Washington declared that the purpose of the militia was “to oppose the introduction of tyranny.” He had come a long way from the days when he accepted the Constitution without a Bill of Rights.
To view Washington’s statement in the context in which it was delivered, please look over the following excerpt taken from Pages 7-8 of an old document published by Gales and Seaton in 1832 entitled “American State Papers – Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States, from the First Session of the First to the Second Session of the Fifteenth Congress, inclusive: commencing March 3, 1789, and ending March 3, 1819”.
This excerpt is a part of Wash- ington’s lengthy Plan No. 2 of 1790. While he also made re- ference to the prevention of invasion and rebellion, Washing- ton said that “the well informed members of the community (the people) were meant to be the real defence of the country”; and “the virtues and knowledge of the people would effectually oppose the introduction of tyranny.”
BREAKING -> Kansas Initiative For November, To Reaffirm ‘The Peoples’ Right to Bear Arms – Counters – Kansas House Resolution Initiative #5017 For November Removing ‘The People’ – 5017 Designed To Outlaw George Washington’s State Militias, Thus Violating The Bill Of Rights.
He warned that “the government would be invaded or overturned, and trampled upon by the bold and ambitious” — meaning people in our own country who operated without adherence to vital principles. The absoluteness of the right of the people to keep and bear arms is a basic principle. Unless the right to arms is absolute, the people cannot remain the ultimate power. The Bill of Rights confirmed that we possess many other rights beside the absolute right to arms. All of the other rights for the preservation of their own existence, depend entirely upon the absoluteness, the force, and the reasoning that have shaped the Second Amend- ment. Washington agreed with Patrick Henry on the purpose of the militia: It was to “oppose the introduction of tyranny.” Make no mistake about it: The prime reason for the Second Amend- ment is prevention of tyranny in government.
EXCERPT FROM GEORGE WASHINGTON’S 1790 PLAN FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MILITIA “An energetic national militia is to be regarded as the capital security of a free republic, and not a standing army, forming a distinct class in the community.
It is the introduction and diffusion of vice, and corruption of manners, into the mass of the people, that renders a standing army necessary. It is when public spirit is despised, and avarice, indolence, and effeminacy of manners predominate, and prevent the establishment of institutions which would elevate the minds of the youth in the paths of virtue and honor, that a standing army is formed and riveted forever.
While the human character remains unchanged, and societies and governments of considerable extent are formed, a principle ever ready to execute the laws, and defend the state, must constantly exist. Without this vital principle, the government would be invaded or overturned, and trampled upon by the bold and ambitious. No community can be long held together, unless its arrangements are adequate to its probable exigencies.
If it should be decided to reject a standing army for the military branch of the government of the United States, as possessing too fierce an aspect, and being hostile to the principles of liberty, it will follow that a well constituted militia ought to be established.
Southern Poverty Law Center Has Become A Danger To America!: Fronts For Islam Training Jihad Militia Groups On U.S. Soil!
A consideration of the subject will show the impracticability of disciplining at once the mass of the people. All discussions on the subject of a powerful militia will result in one or other of the following principles: First, Either efficient institutions must be established for the military education of the youth, and that the knowledge acquired therein shall be diffused throughout the community, by the mean of rotation; or, Secondly, That the militia must be formed of substitutes, after the manner of the militia of Great Britain.
United States Militias: Oath To Support And Defend The Constitution Against All Enemies, Foreign And Domestic If the United States possess the vigor of mind to establish the first institution, it may reasonably be expected to produce the most unequivocal advantages. A glorious national spirit will be introduced, with its extensive train of political consequences. The youth will imbibe a love of their country; reverence and obedience to its laws; courage and elevation of mind; openness and liberality of character; accompanied by a just spirit of honor: in addition to which their bodies will acquire a robustness, greatly conducive to their personal happiness, as well as the defence of their country; while habit, with its silent but efficacious operations, will durably cement the system.
Habit, that powerful and universal law, incessantly acting on the human race, well deserves the attention of legislators—formed at first in individuals, by separate and almost imperceptible impulses, until at length it acquires a force which controls with irresistible sway. The effects of salutary or pernicious habits, operating on a whole nation, are immense, and decide its rank and character in the world.
Hence the science of legislation teaches to scrutinize every national institution, as it may introduce proper or improper habits; to adopt with religious zeal the former, and reject with horror the latter. A republic, constructed on the principles herein stated, would be uninjured by events, sufficient to overturn a government supported solely by the uncertain power of a standing army.
The Tree Of Liberty Must Be Refreshed From Time To Time With The Blood Of Patriots And Tyrants. The well informed members of the community, actuated by the highest motives of self-love, would form the real defence of the country. Rebellions would be prevented or suppressed with ease; invasions of such a government would be undertaken only by mad men; and the virtues and knowledge of the people would effectually oppose the introduction of tyranny.
State Militias May Be Implemented To Root Out Obama’s Illegal Muslim Brotherhood: Islamic Terror Training Camps Inside The USA.
But the second principle, a militia of substitutes, is pregnant, in a degree, with the mischiefs of a standing army; as it is highly probable the substitutes from time to time will be nearly the same men, and the most idle and worthless part of the community. Wealthy families, proud of distinctions which riches may confer, will prevent their sons from serving in the militia of substitutes; the plan will degenerate into habitual contempt; a standing army will be introduced, and the liberties of the people subjected to all the contingencies of events.
The expense attending an energetic establishment of militia may be strongly urged as an objection to the institution. But it is to be remembered, that this objection is leveled at both systems, whether by rotation or by substitutes: for, if the numbers are equal, the expense will also be equal. The estimate of the expense will show its unimportance, when compared with the magnitude and beneficial effects of the institution.
But the people of the United States will cheerfully consent to the expenses of a measure calculated to serve as a perpetual barrier to their liberties; especially as they well know that the disbursements will be made among the members of the same community, and therefore cannot be injurious.
Every intelligent mind would rejoice in the establishment of an institution, under whose auspices the youth and vigor of the constitution would be renewed with each successive generation, and which would appear to secure the great principles of freedom and happiness against the injuries of time and events.
BREAKING! Taking America Down For British Banking Cartel : Russian Troops Coming To America To Counter State Militias!
The following plan is formed on these general principles: First, That it is the indispensable duty of every nation to establish all necessary institutions for its own perfection and defence.
Secondly, That it is a capital security to a free state, for the great body of the people to possess a competent knowledge of the military art.
Thirdly, That this knowledge cannot be attained, in the present state of society, but by establishing adequate institutions for the military education of youth; and that the knowledge acquired therein should be diffused throughout the community by the principles of rotation.
Fourthly, That every man of the proper age, and ability of body, is firmly bound, by the social compact, to perform, personally, his proportion of military duty for the defense of the State
Fifthly, That all men, of the legal military age, should be armed, enrolled, and held responsible for different degrees of military service.
And Sixthly, That agreeably to the constitution, the United States are to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such a part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States; reserving to the States, respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia, according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.”
End of excerpt from the 1790 Plan for Organization of the Militia State Militia Defense Forces For Homeland Security: ~ Against A Rogue Mainstream Government!
GEORGE WASHINGTON George Washington is listed as No. 1 in the Hall of Fame. In addition to his many other remarkable achievements, his Farewell Address also has gone down in history as one of the greatest writings of all time. In it he warned against engaging in foreign influence and entanglements, weakening the fabric of the constitutional government, loss of respect for national morality and religious principles, growth of party spirit, and against the devastation brought on by pretended patriotism.
It was a disgraceful effort which caused February 22nd, Washington’s birthday, to be renamed as President’s Day, thus reducing the respect due to a man who had contributed so much of himself. In his Farewell Address he left us this immortal advice:
“Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor and caprice?
George Washington And Father Augustine Washington
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world….” Yet, we allow our public officials to “police the world”. Further still he said: “One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown…..” Yet, we allow our public officials to effect grievous alterations in the operation of the Constitutional system, swear by the oath of office under pretended allegiance, and destroy our inherent right as the ultimate power in the republic by denying us the use of firearms. Liberty Gun Rights
Obama Surreptitiously Uses Rangel For Attempts To Federalize Bill Of Rights ‘State Militias’ ~ Ethics Panel Finds Rangel Guilty on 11 Violations of House Rules 11/16/2010 Related articles
• 14 United State Governors Prepare State Militia Defenses: To Counter Obama’s Rogue Federal Forces! (politicalvelcraft.org)
• U.S. Governors Prepare State Militia Defenses! (politicalvelcraft.org)
• The States Nullify Unconstitutional Federal Laws, Even When Endorsed By Supreme Court: Public Opinion & Support Make It Easy To Resist Federal Tyranny. (politicalvelcraft.org)
• United States Constitutional Militias: Back To Grass Roots! (politicalvelcraft.org)
• George Washington Agreed with Patrick Henry on the Purpose of the Militia: “He Declared that it was to “Oppose the Introduction of Tyranny” (2ndamendmentright.org)
• America’s State Militia Warns Congress To Back Off! (politicalvelcraft.org)
• The Sheriff Has More Power In His County Than The President Of The United States: U.S. Constitution U.S. Supreme Court ~ Quashes Obama’s Claim To “Supremacy Clause” (politicalvelcraft.org)
• Tony Blair – British Monarchy is World’s Greatest Threat: Threatens The United States Of America! (politicalvelcraft.org)
• Gut check: why the founders wanted us to be allowed to own guns (thebrennerbrief.com)
• In the Shadow of Militias (blinkutopia.com)
Comments Off on President George Washington Structured The Militia System To Prevent Treason And Tyranny By Public Officials!
EXCERPT FROM GEORGE WASHINGTON’S 1790 PLAN FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MILITIA “An energetic national militia is to be regarded as the capital security of a free republic, and not a standing army, forming a distinct class in the community.
By: John L. Perry
President George Washington Structured The Militia System To Prevent Treason And Tyranny By Public Officials!
In this special video presentation for Prison Planet.tv members filmed from the new Infowars television studio, Alex Jones hosts a round table discussion featuring Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, founder and executive director of the Tenth Amendment Center Michael Boldin, as well as activist and economic writer Brandon Smith of Alt-Market, to discuss the states’ rights movement and how Americans need to organize now to take back power usurped in a myriad of different ways by the federal government.
Rhodes explains how history tells us that tyranny can never be enforced without the aid of uniformed military and police, highlighting the case of East Germany where troops were told to stand down and two days later the Berlin wall fell. Rhodes documents how the implementation of a totalitarian infrastructure in the United States has led to the President having supreme power to assassinate US citizens by declaring them “enemy combatants” and how this sets an ominous benchmark for the level of power that has been accumulated by the executive branch of government. The federal government, the Southern Policy Law Center and the ADL have all targeted Oath Keepers simply because the group attempts to re-affirm commitment to the bill of rights amongst active duty soldiers and law enforcement.
Flash Popup window: Watch Now .WMV download: (right-click) .Mp4 download: (right-click) Not a member? CLICK HERE to subscribe now!
Michael Boldin invokes the words of the founding fathers who warned that federal power would always grow like a cancer unless the American people used the tool of nullification to strike at the root of such tyranny. Nullification is about rendering a particular law null and void, unenforceable within a state, explains Boldin, and it is the duty of American citizens to oversee this process to stymie federal power instantaneously, not wait until after an election or a legal battle. Boldin has led the effort to promote this ideal with the recent Nullify Now tour.
Brandon Smith joins to discuss the recent federal persecution and raid of the makers of the Liberty Dollar, who were labeled as domestic terrorists because they merely challenged the legitimacy of the federal reserve by encouraging Americans to use sound money. Smith talks about the necessity for communities to set up alternative forms of trade and barter in order to drastically reduce their exposure to dollar devaluation that otherwise threatens to completely eviscerate their economic livelihoods.
This video presentation is brimming with solutions on how ordinary American citizens can contribute to a purposeful and achievable move to reclaim their sovereignty, dignity, financial and political freedoms. We encourage all our subscribers to watch this video now at Prison Planet.tv by visiting the “video reports” section. Not a member? Please click here to subscribe and get instant access to this interview, along with thousands of hours of material, including daily access to the live video stream and video archives of The Alex Jones Show. Death Toll For United States Military Power: Defense Secretary Gates Excised $178 Billion & Obama To Excise Another $400 Billion ~ Leaving America Naked!
There is a remote, although gaining possibility, America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
# Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
# They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
# They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
# They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
State’s Constitutional Militias: Sovereign Militias Buy More Firearms In 3 Months, Than What It Takes To Outfit The Entire Chinese And Indian Armies Combined!
# They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
# They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
# They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before. So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do? State Militias May Be Implemented To Root Out Obama’s Illegal Muslim Brotherhood: Islamic Terror Training Camps Inside The USA.
Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan‘s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?
Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?
What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?
Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?
Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared responsibility? Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.
Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say, “We can always worry about that later.”
In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.
COPY – PASTE BELOW ARTICLES IN YOUR BROWSER
• What Must Be Done To Restore America. • Satan To Distance Self From Rothschild, Soros, McCain, Bloomberg, Lieberman, Reid, Rockefeller, & Maurice Strong! • Biden To Pakistan: Its Official: Pakistan Passes Law Allowing Assassination Of Anyone Who “insults” Muhammad ~ Who BTW, Was Poisoned To Death In 610 A.D. For Murdering A Jewish Woman’s Family. • FBI Identified Terrorist Network Of Muslim Brotherhood & Obama Attack Israel: Islamic Brotherhood – Globalist’s Secret Weapon • BiPartisan Communist Effort To Violate The 4th Amendment By Reintroducing The Patriot [sic] Act: What About Reintroducing The Glass Steagall Act???? • No, Obama Is Not A Screwup: British Crown’s Ideologically-Driven Strategic Ineptitude -> Illuminati Chaos. • Federal Judge Confirms CAIR ~ Are Hamas Terrorists: Hamas Grew Out Of The Muslim Brotherhood. • Muslim Brotherhood Granted ‘Direct Access’ To Taxpayer’s Stimulus Grants By Obama! • Muslim Brotherhood’s Terror Training Camps Inside The USA. • Energy Myths Of The Banker’s New World Order Scheme • Rothschild’s Use Of Islam, To Shake The Piggy Banks Of The World: You Can Slaughter Christians, But You Can’t Burn A Koran. • OBAMA EXPUNGING MILITARY STRENGTH: EFFEMINATES, SURGES AFGHAN KILLING FIELDS, REDUCES HOMELAND RECRUITMENT. Related articles • 14 United State Governors Prepare State Militia Defenses: To Counter Obama’s Rogue Federal Forces! (politicalvelcraft.org) • Martial Law Is An Aberration ~ An Act Of Treason! (politicalvelcraft.org) • Military Coup Could Oust Obama & NYC Bloomberg! (politicalvelcraft.org) • Walking Tall Tennessee: Lieberman & McCain Unconstitutional NDAA Tyranny Rule To Be Nullified By State! (politicalvelcraft.org) • World War 3 ~ Rothschild To Strike The Anvil While The Metal Is Still Hot! (politicalvelcraft.org) • Our Infrastructure Being Built By Chinese Firms & Workers (gadabout-blogalot.com) • Guest Post: Understanding The Slave Mentality (zerohedge.com) • Rothschilds Want Iran’s Banks: Rothschild Obtained Iraq’s Central Bank, Rothschild Obtained Muammar Gaddafi Gold ~ Syria & Iran Next Co-Opting U.S. Military Machine! (politicalvelcraft.org) • How To Destroy The New World Order Scheme: Critical Thinking ~ Stop Being Victimized As ‘Human Capital’ (politicalvelcraft.org) • The States Nullify Unconstitutional Federal Laws, Even When Endorsed By Supreme Court: Public Opinion & Support Make It Easy To Resist Federal Tyranny. (politicalvelcraft.org) • McCain And The List Of The Other Belligerent 54 Corrupt Senators ~ Who Blocked Removal Of Language Detaining Americans In The NDAA Bill. (politicalvelcraft.org) Related articles • Americans To Begin Killing One Another Over Rothschild Soros Choreographed Looting Scheme? (politicalvelcraft.org) • The Receivers Of The United States Bankruptcy: The Rothschild International Bankers, The United Nations, The World Bank, & The Rothschild IMF. (politicalvelcraft.org) • Roman Catholic Pope Benedict XVI: Earth’s Ecosystem Damaged By Rothschild Hoarding And Not By Healthy Carbon Dioxide! (politicalvelcraft.org) • Obama Law Tab Hits $2,800,000.00: Contempt Of Court, Contempt Of Congress, Contempt Of Constitution! (politicalvelcraft.org) • INS Agent Michael Cutler: Violent Gangs From All Over The World Are Infesting American Cities! (politicalvelcraft.org) • Obama Reelection Insurrection Imminent (fromthetrenchesworldreport.com) • Second Amendment: It’s Not About Hunting, It’s About Tyranny (jeenyuscorner.com)
Comments Off on Obama’s Removal: Rothschild Tyranny Can Never Be Enforced Without The Aid Of Uniformed Military And Police!
Sorcha Faal is a known disinformation agent, most of the time!
How true this is, is your responsibility to research.
World’s Largest English Language News Service with Over 500 Articles Updated Daily “The News You Need Today…For The World You’ll Live In Tomorrow.” What You Aren’t Being Told About The World You Live In How The “Conspiracy Theory” Label Was Conceived To Derail The Truth Movement How Covert American Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations US Supreme Court Justice Scalia Had Secret Texas Meeting With Obama Just Hours Before His Death By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers A stunning report prepared for the Office of the President (OP) by the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) examining the letter sent to President Putin by American billionaire Donald Trump last week that appeared to predict the murder of US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia suggests that just hours before this esteemed jurists death he had held a secret meeting with President Barack Obama aboard a US Air Force plane heading to a secluded Texas ranch owned by a close personal friend and top campaign donor of America’s leader.
US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (left) and President Barack Obama (right)
According to this report, SVR “assests” reported that on 11 February both President Obama and Justice Scalia were at Joint Base Andrews (JBA) scheduled for two separate US Air Force flights from Andrews Field—the first taking President Obama to Los Angeles, and the second taking Justice Scalia to Marfa Municipal Airport (KMRF) located in the southwestern region of Texas near the Mexican border. While President Obama was scheduled to depart on one of the US Air Force’s two Boeing VC-25 aircraft (commonly referred to as Air Force One), this report continues, Justice Scalia’s flight was scheduled aboard a Gulfstream C-37A—which is the US Air Force’s designation for their fleet of the popular Gulfstream V private jet aircraft.
Just prior to these two US Air Force aircraft departing from Andrews Field, this report notes, SVR “assests” assigned to monitoring top American political and military figures noted a “discrepancy from normal protocol” when Justice Scalia’s three US Marshal Services Judicial Security Division (JSD) “protectors/defenders” left the airbase with the “personal protection” of this noted jurist being transferred to the US Secret Service (SS). Upon both President Obama and Justice Scalia’s different flights departing from Andrews Field, this report continues detailing; an even greater “discrepancy from normal protocol” was noted by the SVR when they were informed by Aerospace Forces (AF) satellite monitoring personal that US Air Force F-16 fighter aircraft from three different bases (Shaw Air Force Base, Montgomery Field and Luke Air Force Base) accompanied the entire flights of both the Boeing VC-25 and the Gulfstream C-37A—a level of protection normally only afforded to the US President exclusively. As to why the US Air Force provided F-16 fighter aircraft protection to Justice Scalia’s flight, this report continues, became even more concerning to the SVR when after the flight landed in Marfa, Texas, this “extreme protective air cover” was maintained until the Gulfstream C-37A departed three hours later and flew to Los Angeles Air Force Base (LAAFB) accompanied by its fighter plane escort—and where at the exact same time the American press covering President Obama began questioning where he was, only to be told that President Obama had been missing due to a late-night, off-the-books dinner with three of Hollywood’s elite the White House wouldn’t further comment on.
This SVR report, though, “strongly suggests” that President Obama had, in fact, been aboard the Gulfstream C-37A with Justice Scalia from Andrews Field to Marfa and then further traveled from Texas to Los Angeles on it—which they say is the only conclusion to be reached due to the US Air Force’s continuous protection of it. In support of this conclusion, this report continues, AF radar and electronic spectrum satellite analysis of Marfa, where the Gulfstream C-37A landed with Justice Scalia and (maybe) President Obama, shows a four vehicle convoy leaving the KMRF airport and traveling to a 12,140 hectar (30,000 acre) estate called the Cibolo Creek Ranch. Critical to note about this Cibolo Creek Ranch, this report says, is that is owned by Texas multi-millionaire John Poindexter—who aside from being the owner of the vast conglomerate J.B. Poindexter&Co., Inc., is a longtime personal friend of President Obama who in one of his first duties upon elected bestowed a war medal upon Poindexter for his service during the Vietnam War.
John Poindexter (left) and President Barack Obama (right)
Of even greater concern about President Obama’s personal friend John Poindexter, SVR analysts in this report state, is that within 36 hours of Justice Scalia arriving at his Cibolo Creek Ranch estate he, Poindexter, reported to the media that the jurist had died—and who then coordinated with local Texas officials to have Justice Scalia declared dead via a phone conversation with the area medical examiner without an actual medical examination of the body in clear violation of Texas law which states an autopsy is to be preformed when “the body or a body part of a person is found and the cause or circumstances of death are unknown.
With Justice Scalia being reported found dead while in John Poindexter’s estate, this report continues, this esteemed jurist was further said to have been found with a pillow over his head while laying dead in his bed in un-wrinkled bed clothes—which just by these reports alone, under Texas law, demanded that an autopsy be preformed to identify the cause of death.
As the Obama regime continues with its cover-up of Justice Scalia’s death, this report concludes, President Obama’s pre-knowledge by hours of Justice Scalia’s death, along with former US Army intelligence officer Ray Starmann stating his concerns that “foul play” was involved, the shocked American people in a new poll shows that fully 79% of them suspect this jurist was murdered—but which the SVR, though continuing their investigation, may never know the entire details about.
Senior officials with the U.S. Department of Justice recently announced possible legal changes which could allow the government greater room to combat so-called “anti-government extremists”. On Thursday February 4, Reuters reported that John Carlin, the Justice Department’s chief of national security, and federal prosecutors are looking for new tools to deal with the rise of “domestic extremists.”
“Based on recent reports and the cases we are seeing, it seems like we’re in a heightened environment,” Carlin told Reuters. Reuters notes that the U.S. government is facing an increase in opposition from militia groups, “sovereign citizens,” and other “anti-government extremists.”
However, federal officials like Carlin claim they are impeded in their pursuit of violent domestic terrorists because, although there is currently a U.S. law that prohibits “material” support of internationally recognized terror groups, there is not such a law for domestic groups. Reuters reports:
Carlin and other Justice Department officials declined to say if they would ask Congress for a comparable domestic extremist statute, or comment on what other changes they might pursue to toughen the fight against anti-government extremists.
The U.S. State Department designates international terrorist organizations to which it is illegal to provide “material support.” No domestic groups have that designation, helping to create a disparity in charges faced by international extremist suspects compared to domestic ones.
Carlin told Reuters that his counter-terrorism team is taking a “thoughtful look at the nature and scope of the domestic terrorism threat” and looking for “potential legal improvements and enhancements to better combat those threats.” The Justice Department will identify cases being prosecuted at the state level that “could arguably meet the federal definition of domestic terrorism.”
Carlin and his team are not only remaining quiet about whether or not they are pursuing the legal changes but the entire team has not been revealed to the public. This means we have an unelected, secret team of people working on identifying which Americans should be deemed “domestic extremists.” Will Freedom Activists be Targeted?
Carlin’s silence should alarm all activists who consider themselves opposed to the policies of the U.S. government. Not only are those who espouse anti-government or pro-freedom rhetoric likely to be targeted but the penalty for being a part of such a group, or supporting such a group could eventually mean years in prison. Current laws allow for a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for Americans who support groups on the State Department list of designated terrorist organizations.
Under a 1994 law federal prosecutors could attempt to bring “material support” terrorism charges against people who are linked to groups not on the State Department’s list but this has only happened twice since the law was enacted. If the Justice Department creates a list of groups that are deemed extremist or terrorist this could lead to stifling of free speech and expression.
Part of the problem is the broad definition of “extremism” itself. As far as the pursuit and defense against “extremism” is concerned, the United States government has failed to adequately define the term, and by doing so, is allowing for perfectly legal behavior to become taboo or even criminalized. In June 2014, TruthInMedia’s Jay Syrmopouloswrote about this trend:
First there was the MIAC report, which claimed that potential terrorists include people who own gold, Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, and even people who fly the U.S. flag.
Then in 2012, there was a leaked Homeland Security study that claimed Americans who are ‘reverent of individual liberty,’ and ‘suspicious of centralized federal authority’ are possible ‘extreme right-wing’ terrorists.
More recently, there is a Department of Defense training manual, obtained by Judicial Watch via a FOIA request, that lists people who embrace “individual liberties” and honor “states’ rights,” among other characteristics, as potential “extremists” who are likely to be members of “hate groups.”
This document goes on to call the Founding Fathers extremists, stating, “In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements,“ including “[t]he colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule.” If the United States government cannot clearly define who it is targeting in its war on extremism how are the people supposed to trust that these programs will not simply be used to target outspoken activists and critics of the government?
A Domestic War on “Extremism”?
These possible legal changes are only the latest effort to combat “extremism” by the Justice Department. In October 2015 Anti Media reported that the United Nations and the Department of Justice announced the creation of a new program designed to help local communities combat “violent extremism.” Called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), the plan calls for “systematic efforts” to “share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”
U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch said, “The Strong Cities Network will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration, ”and will “enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”
“To counter violent extremism we need determined action at all levels of governance,” said Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo. “To succeed, we must coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders.” The creation of the Smart Cities Network comes after the Justice Department announced it would revive a task force on domestic terrorism in an attempt to stop violence within the United States. In June 2014, former Attorney General Eric Holder stated the Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee would work to eliminate dangers from violent individuals who may be motivated by anti-government or racist views. The Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Division of the Justice Department, and the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee are in charge of the efforts. The committee was originally launched to focus on right-wing extremism in the aftermath of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
As Americans slowly awaken to the truth of the American Empire, the powers that wish they were are scrambling to tighten their control grid. If the American public will not be subdued and distracted by elections or dead-stream media bread and circuses, the Ruling Class will have to resort to more direct methods of stifling freedom. This presents the perfect opportunity for those living amongst the zombies to organize and strategize for solutions that do not rely on government or their corporate partners.
Derrick Broze is an investigative journalist and liberty activist. He is a news editor forActivistPost.com and the founder of the TheConsciousResistance.com. Follow him on Twitter.
“Americans who are ‘reverent of individual liberty,’ and ‘suspicious of centralized federal authority’ are possible ‘extreme right-wing’ terrorists. More recently, there is a Department of Defense training manual, obtained by Judicial Watch via a FOIA request, that lists people who embrace “individual liberties” and honor “states’ rights,” among other characteristics, as potential “extremists” who are likely to be members of “hate groups.” This document goes on to call the Founding Fathers extremists, stating, “In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements,“ including “[t]he colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule.” If the United States government cannot clearly define who it is targeting in its war on extremism how are the people supposed to trust that these programs will not simply be used to target outspoken activists and critics of the government?”?????? Well! According to that, I am some kind of security threat, and believe me if I was forty years younger I would prove them right! However, I support my right to have any fucking kind of opinion that I want, about an Illegal government especially. And even if it was a legal government I would still oppose these ass-holes on general principal. How many of these son-of-bitches do you think are not making a damn fortune selling out to big business? How many of them are supporting our Original Constitution? How many of them are screwing little children, or poking little boy’s in the butt? How many of them are manipulating less powerful business by threats of tyrannical laws? I could go on and on till hell freezes over and never come close to the debauchery of these bastards. TERRIOST, HELL YES I’M A TERRIOST! Because if I could I would send every one of them to hell, begging to stay there!
Comments Off on The Department Of Justice Prepares To Step Up War On Domestic Extremists
On Wednesday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe.
This amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.
The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and Obama, speaking there just days ago, insisted that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam (which it is). Obama is redefining jihad terror to include everyone but the jihadists. So will the UN, driven largely by the sharia-enforcing Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the pro-Islamic post-American
President Obama, use a “global police force” to crush counter-jihad forces? After all, with Obama knowingly aiding al-Qaeda forces in Syria, how likely is it that he will use his “global police force” against actual Islamic jihadists? I suspect that instead, this global police force will be used to impose the blasphemy laws under the sharia (Islamic law), and to silence all criticism of Islam for the President who proclaimed that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
What is a global police force doing in our cities? This is exactly the abdication of American sovereignty that I warned about in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. The Obama Department of Justice made it clear that it was exactly that when it distributed a press release last week announcing the “Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism.” In that press release, the DoJ complained that “while many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”
So if the local and municipal effort to counter the euphemistic and disingenuous “violent extremism” is inadequate and hasn’t developed “systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale,” the feds – and the UN – have to step in. Thus the groundwork is being laid for federal and international interference down to the local level. “The Strong Cities Network,” Lynch declared, “will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration” – i.e., local dependence on federal and international authorities.
Lynch made the global (that is, United Nations) involvement clear when she added: “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”
This internationalist character was brought to the fore by the fact that the Strong Cities Network was launched on September 29 not at the White House or the Department of Homeland Security, or at the FBI headquarters or anywhere else that might be fitting for a national project, but at the United Nations.
Even more ominously, the DoJ press release says that the Strong Cities Network “will strengthen strategic planning and practices to address violent extremism in all its forms by fostering collaboration among cities, municipalities and other sub-national authorities.” Sub-national and international: the press release then quotes Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo, Norway, a participant in the Strong Cities Network, saying: “To counter violent extremism we need determined action at all levels of governance. To succeed, we must coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders. The Strong Cities Network will enable cities across the globe pool our resources, knowledge and best practices together and thus leave us standing stronger in the fight against one of the greatest threats to modern society.”
But what is that greatest threat, exactly? Remember, the DoJ presser says that the SCN will “address violent extremism in all its forms.” It also says that it will aid initiatives that are working toward “building social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism.” “Building social cohesion” is a euphemism for keeping peace between non-Muslim and Muslim communities – mostly by making sure that non-Muslims don’t complain too loudly about, much less work against, rapidly expanding Muslim populations and the Islamization of their communities.
The DoJ presser noted that at the launch of the Strong Cities Network, “welcoming remarks” would be offered by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City. The involvement of New York City’s Marxist internationalist mayor is yet another warning sign. Assert American sovereignty and individual rights. Contact your representatives now. Exhort them to oppose SCN now. Exhort them to keep America free – while it still is.
Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter here. Like her on Facebook here. Read More Stories About: Big Government, Jihad
By now, all of my readers should know that OBUMA is a covert assassin who was put in office by the Banking Cartel, and his #1 objective is to devastate our country. By that I mean; use any and all methods to destroy everything we hold dear, and make American’s Banker Dependent street Beggars. He has performed like the organ grinder monkey he is from day one, and is sure to reap his rewards. When the blue hats come for you, put one between their eyes.
Comments Off on Obama Administration and U.N. Announce “Global Police Force” to Fight Extremism In U.S.
Why Buying Gold Won’t Save You from the Zombie Apocalypse … Despite any advice you might have heard to the contrary, gold bullion is far from a good investment, even if the world is coming to an end. The idea of having a hedge against the end of the world and the collapse of our financial institutions might be alluring. But actually, buying and storing significant amounts of gold bullion won’t do you any good in that unlikely event, despite any advice you might have heard to the contrary. – Fool.com
Of course the above excerpt is brought to us by the Motley Fool, one of the bigger mainstream investment web destinations. The description is entirely predictable and could have found a home at Bloomberg, CNN or even CNBC. Gold is always to be portrayed as a Keynesian “barbaric relic.”
In fact, we learn later in the description that there are specific assets you should own “in the event of an apocalypse.” Gold is not one of them.
The featured expert, John Maxfield, has a thing or two to say about gold. “Here’s how I think about gold, and this is how I would recommend that investors think about gold, or anyone who’s thinking about buying gold for any type of investing purposes. As a general rule, investing in gold is a bad idea, and here’s why.
“When you invest, your biggest ally is compound returns, because that grows the size of your returns without you doing anything on an annual basis, and pretty soon, your small returns of 1% or 2% a year turn into 50%, 60% a year on your original basis. But in order to tap into compound returns, you’ve got to be invested into an income-earning asset. And the problem with gold is it doesn’t own any assets.”
Maxfield does grant that gold is a “hedge against anarchy” but says if society is really collapsing, you probably want to stock up on medicine and antibiotics rather than gold. Ironically, another anti-gold epicenter – Reuters – provides us with a rebuttal to the Fool. In a post just today entitled, “Central banks and Chinese buyers helping to spur gold demand,” Reuters is uncharacteristically upbeat about the yellow metal’s prospects going forward.
Buying by central banks as well as Chinese investors seeking protection from a weakening currency helped lift demand for gold in the final quarter of last year and the trend looks set to continue, the World Gold Council said …
China remained the world’s biggest consumer of gold last year, ahead of India, with economic headwinds influencing purchasing, the WGC said in its annual “Gold Demand Trends” report. The WGC’s members include the world’s leading gold mining companies. Chinese demand for gold coins surged 25 percent in the fourth quarter from a year earlier as consumers sought to protect their wealth after Beijing devalued the yuan currency.
It’s not just physical gold. Miners are up and silver is up, too. Oddly enough, it is central banks that have been leading the charge toward gold.
Reuters: “Central banks have been buying gold to diversify their reserves away from the U.S. dollar and their purchases edged up to 588.4 tonnes last year, second only to a record high 625.5 tonnes in 2013.” Turmoil in the markets, falling oil prices and a potential global recession have all contributed to a positive precious metals outlook, according to WGC.
Well …We agree about gold – we can see and sense the resurgence of the price against the dollar – but we disagree that the world is going back into a recession. In fact, we think the world is in a kind of greater depression and that the golden bull goes all the way back to the early 2000s after the dotcom bust. But let’s go back even farther.
Central bank business cycles are manufactured ones and if you really want to make sense of where we are today, you have to start after World War II when the global economy was “reset.”
The paraphernalia of the modern world was created after World War II, including the IMF, the World Bank and the United Nations. The Bank for International Settlements was rejiggered as well. The later 1940s were a time of gathering energy and then the ’50s and the ’60s were explosively “prosperous” in the US and even the West. There were many books written about the “miracle” of the US economy and the superior model of US capitalism itself. We’ve called this period in the US – and the West – “dreamtime.”
That’s because a good deal of the prosperity was due to money printing and other kinds of financial manipulation. In 1971, when France attempted to take delivery of the gold it was owed, the US promptly went off the gold standard and Nixon created the petrodollar.
The 1970s reverberated with the monetary sins of the previous decade. Keynesians discovered “stagflation,” which wasn’t supposed to exist. And as price inflation rose, so did middle-class anxiety. Enter Paul Volcker, David Rockefeller’s right-hand man. Early in the 1980s, Volcker did what most thought was impossible. He raised rates near 20 percent and froze the dollar in its tracks. Banks foundered and another Great Depression loomed. But instead, the economy recovered.
Post-Volcker, the next great Paper Bull arose. Wall Street shone and securitization boomed. For another 20 years, through 2000, the Paper Bull roared. But that was the end of it. The dotcom crash definitively crumpled the Paper Bull. Gold began an unstoppable rise that culminated at the end of the decade near US$2,000.
Of course, most believed we were in “another” recession by then, post-2008. But really it was just a continuation of what was begun in 2001.
Everything else is just a manipulation.
Bernanke screwed rates down to a point where he created a faux recovery in the mid-2000s. But it didn’t last because it couldn’t. The great gold plunge was likely a manipulated one, further confusing people’s perceptions of what was really going on. Today, people speak confusedly about a “recession” and the “recovery” of gold.
In truth, the “recession” began in the early-2000s and is more of a “greater depression.” The “recovery” of gold well may be simply the reassertion of reality. Gold will return to where it should be against the dollar – at US$2,000 or more. Some say the dollar should be trading against gold at US$5,000.
From our perspective, this makes what’s going on now a good deal clearer – along with the inevitable results. There have been two great Paper Bull runs in the 20th century. And now in the 21st, the Golden Bull dominates. In fact, this is the reason for so much unease in the financial community. The Golden Bull is rampant and they know it. Conclusion:
The Golden Bull probably will not be turned aside again. Make your plans accordingly.
Comments Off on As Central Banks Dim, Gold Brightens
"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from his government." -Thomas Paine
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out...without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, and intolerable.” FL. Hamer