Log in

Archive for November, 2012

The Bankruptcy of The United States

November 30th, 2012 by


United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303

Speaker-Rep. James Traficant, Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House:

(Quote) "Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11… Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner's report that will lead to our demise.

 It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and
Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.
The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers.

With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund.

Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part:

"The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States."

Gold and silver were such a powerful money during the founding of the united states of America, that the founding fathers declared that only gold  or silver coins can be "money" in America. Since gold and silver coinage were heavy and inconvenient for a lot of transactions, they were stored inbanks and a claim check was issued as a money substitute. People traded their coupons as money, or "currency." Currency is not money, but a money substitute. Redeemable currency must promise to pay a dollar equivalent in gold or silver money. Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) make no such promises, and are not "money." A Federal Reserve Note is a debt obligation of the federal United States government, not "money?'

The federal United States government and the U.S. Congress were not and have never been authorized by the Constitution for the united states of America to issue currency of any kind, but only lawful money, -gold and silver coin. It is essential that we comprehend the distinction between real money and paper money substitute. One cannot get rich by accumulating money
substitutes, one can only get deeper into debt. We the People no longer have any "money." Most Americans have not been paid any "money" for a very long time, perhaps not in their entire life. Now do you comprehend why you feel broke? Now, do you understand why you are "bankrupt," along with the rest of the country?

Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) are unsigned checks written on a closed account. FRNs are an inflatable paper system designed to create debt through inflation (devaluation of currency). when ever there is an increase of the supply of a money substitute in the economy without a corresponding increase in the gold and silver backing, inflation occurs.

Inflation is an invisible form of taxation that irresponsible governments inflict on their citizens. The Federal Reserve Bank who controls the supply and movement of FRNs has everybody fooled. They have access to an unlimited supply of FRNs, paying only for the printing costs of what they need. FRNs are nothing more than promissory notes for U.S. Treasury securities
(T-Bills) – a promise to pay the debt to the Federal Reserve Bank.

There is a fundamental difference between "paying" and "discharging" a debt. To pay a debt, you must pay with value or substance (i.e. gold, silver, barter or a commodity). With FRNs, you can only discharge a debt.  You cannot pay a debt with a debt currency system. You cannot service a debt with a currency that has no backing in value or substance. No contract in
Common law is valid unless it involves an exchange of "good & valuable consideration." Un-payable debt transfers power and control to the sovereign power structure that has no interest in money, law, equity or justice because they have so much wealth already.

Their lust is for power and control. Since the inception of central banking, they have controlled the fates of nations.

The Federal Reserve System is based on the Canon law and the principles of sovereignty protected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In fact, the international bankers used a "Canon Law Trust" as their model, adding stock and naming it a "Joint Stock Trust." The U.S. Congress had passed a law making it illegal for any legal "person" to duplicate a "Joint Stock Trust" in 1873. The Federal Reserve Act was legislated post-facto (to 1870), although post-facto laws are strictly forbidden by the Constitution. [1:9:3]

The Federal Reserve System is a sovereign power structure separate and distinct from the federal United States government. The Federal Reserve is a maritime lender, and/or maritime insurance underwriter to the federal United States operating exclusively under Admiralty/Maritime law. The lender or underwriter bears the risks, and the Maritime law compelling specific
performance in paying the interest, or premiums are the same.

 Assets of the debtor can also be hypothecated (to pledge something as a security without taking possession of it.) as security by the lender or underwriter. The Federal Reserve Act stipulated that the interest on the debt was to be paid in gold. There was no stipulation in the Federal Reserve Act for ever paying the principle.

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

 In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States corporation all the credit "money substitute" it needed. Like any other debtor, the federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the federal United States didn't have any assets, they assigned the private property of their "economic slaves", the U.S. citizens as collateral against the un-payable federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations, as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

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

 This has been going on for over eighty years without the "informed knowledge" of the American people, without a voice protesting loud enough.  Now it's easy to grasp why America is fundamentally bankrupt.

 Why don't more people own their properties outright?

Why are 90% of Americans mortgaged to the hilt and have little or no assets after all debts and liabilities have been paid?

Why does it feel like you are working harder and harder and getting less and less?

We are reaping what has been sown, and the results of our harvest is a painful bankruptcy, and a foreclosure on American property, precious liberties, and a way of life. Few of our elected representatives in Washington, D.C. have dared to tell the truth. The federal United States is bankrupt. Our children will inherit this un-payable debt, and the tyranny to enforce paying it.

 America has become completely bankrupt in world leadership, financial credit and its reputation for courage, vision and human rights. This is an undeclared economic war, bankruptcy, and economic slavery of the most corrupt order! Wake up America! Take back your Country."


Are you connecting the dots now, fellow patriots? Now you should understand why your house deed identifies you as a tenet. Now, you should understand why your so called elected representatives don’t give a flip what you think or say. Now you should understand who controls the elections and everything else in this land of slaves. Land of the free, and the home of the brave, MY ASS! I would bet there is not one in fifty thousand of you willing to get even. Support the three percent, as they are your only hope of regaining your freedom. Support the alternative media, we are your only source of truth. OR, you can kiss ass with the local tyrants in law enforcement. That is, until they are ordered to round you up and transport you to a detention center. SEE, http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/800-concentration-camps-in-the-usa/


The Giant Currency Superstorm That Is Coming To The Shores Of America When The Dollar Dies

November 29th, 2012 by


By Truther

By recklessly printing, borrowing and spending money, our authorities are absolutely shredding confidence in the U.S. dollar.  The rest of the world is watching this nonsense, and at some point they are going to give up on the U.S. dollar and throw their hands up in the air.  When that happens, it is going to be absolutely catastrophic for the U.S. economy.  Right now, we export a lot of our inflation.  Each year, we buy far more from the rest of the world than they buy from us, and so the rest of the world ends up with giant piles of U.S. dollars.  This works out pretty well for them, because the U.S. dollar is the primary reserve currency of the world and is used in international trade far more than any other currency is.  Back in 1999, the percentage of foreign exchange reserves in U.S. dollars peaked at 71 percent, and since then it has slid back to 62.2 percent.  But that is still an overwhelming amount.  We can print, borrow and spend like crazy because the rest of the world is there to soak up our excess dollars because they need them to trade with one another.  But what will happen someday if the rest of the world decides to reject the U.S. dollar?  At that point we would see a tsunami of U.S. dollars come flooding back to this country.  Just take a moment and think of the worst superstorm that you can possibly imagine, and then replace every drop of rain with a dollar bill.  The giant currency superstorm that will eventually hit this nation will be far worse than that.

Most Americans don’t realize that there are far more dollars in use in the rest of the world than in the United States itself.  The following is from a scholarly article by Linda Goldberg

The dollar is a major form of cash currency around the world. The majority of dollar banknotes are estimated to be held outside the US. More than 70% of hundred-dollar notes and nearly 60% of twenty- and fifty-dollar notes are held abroad, while two-thirds of all US banknotes have been in circulation outside the country since 1990

For decades we have been exporting gigantic quantities of our currency.

So what would happen if that process suddenly reversed and massive piles of dollars started coming back into the country?

It is frightening to think about.

Well, I guess the key is to get the rest of the world to continue to have confidence in the U.S. dollar so that will never happen, right?

Unfortunately, there are lots of signs that the rest of the world is accelerating their move away from the U.S. dollar.

For example, it was recently announced that the BRICS countries are developing their own version of the World Bank

The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) bloc has begun planning its own development bank and a new bailout fund which would be created by pooling together an estimated $240 billion in foreign exchange reserves, according to diplomatic sources. To get a sense of how significant the proposed fund would be, the fund would be larger than the combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of about 150 countries, according to Russia and India Report.

And as I noted in a previous article, over the past few years there have been a whole host of new international currency agreements that encourage the use of national currencies over the U.S. dollar.  The following are just a few examples…

1. China and Germany (See Here)

2. China and Russia (See Here)

3. China and Brazil (See Here)

4. China and Australia (See Here)

5. China and Japan (See Here)

6. India and Japan (See Here)

7. Iran and Russia (See Here)

8. China and Chile (See Here)

9. China and the United Arab Emirates (See Here)

10. China, Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa (See Here)

Will this movement soon become a stampede away from the U.S. dollar?

That is a very important question.

But you don’t hear anything about this in the U.S. media and our politicians are not talking about this at all.

Meanwhile, our “leaders” seem to be doing everything that they can to destroy confidence in the U.S. dollar.  The Federal Reserve is printing money like there is no tomorrow, and the federal governmentcontinues to run up trillion dollar deficits year after year.

They do not seem to understand that they are systematically destroying the U.S. financial system.

Other world leaders get it.  For example, Russian President Vladimir Putin once said the following…

“Unreasonable expansion of the budget deficit, accumulation of the national debt – are as destructive as an adventurous stock market game.

During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure no one would want history to repeat itself.”


Why can’t most of our politicians see how destructive debt is?

What the federal government continues to do is absolutely insane.  The national debt increased by more than 24 billion dollars on the day after Thanksgiving this year.  But utter disaster has not struck yet, and most Americans are not really that concerned about the debt.  So things just keep rolling along.

And of course our national debt of $16,309,738,056,362.44 is nothing when compared to the future liabilities that our federal government is facing.  Just check out what a recent article in the Wall Street Journal had to say about all this…

The actual liabilities of the federal government—including Social Security, Medicare, and federal employees’ future retirement benefits—already exceed $86.8 trillion, or 550% of GDP. For the year ending Dec. 31, 2011, the annual accrued expense of Medicare and Social Security was $7 trillion. Nothing like that figure is used in calculating the deficit. In reality, the reported budget deficit is less than one-fifth of the more accurate figure.

Other economists paint an even gloomier picture.  According to economist Niall Ferguson, the U.S. government is facing future unfunded liabilities of 238 trillion dollars.

So where are we going to get all that money?

Well, why don’t we just print more money than ever before so that the U.S. government can borrow and spend more money than ever before?

Don’t laugh.  That is actually what some of the top economists in the country are actually recommending.

The most famous economic journalist in the entire country, Paul Krugman of the New York Times, is boldly proclaiming that the solution to all of our problems is to print, borrow and spend a lot more money.  He insists that there is no reason to fear that the giant mountain of debt that we are accumulating will someday collapse the system…

For we have our own currency — and almost all of our debt, both private and public, is denominated in dollars. So our government, unlike the Greek government, literally can’t run out of money. After all, it can print the stuff. So there’s almost no risk that America will default on its debt — I’d say no risk at all if it weren’t for the possibility that Republicans would once again try to hold the nation hostage over the debt ceiling.

But if the U.S. government prints money to pay its bills, won’t that lead to inflation? No, not if the economy is still depressed.

Now, it’s true that investors might start to expect higher inflation some years down the road. They might also push down the value of the dollar. Both of these things, however, would actually help rather than hurt the U.S. economy right now: expected inflation would discourage corporations and families from sitting on cash, while a weaker dollar would make our exports more competitive.

Of course what he is prescribing is complete and utter madness.

At some point this con game is going to collapse and the rest of the world is going to say a big, fat, resounding “NO” to the U.S. dollar.

Why should they continue to use a currency that is becoming extremely unstable and that is constantly being manipulated?

And when the rest of the world rejects the U.S. dollar, the value of the dollar will drop like a rock because there will be far less global demand for it.

In addition, if the rest of the world is not using the U.S. dollar for trade any longer, other nations will cease to soak up our excess currency and huge mountains of our currency that are floating around out there will start flooding back to our shores.

At that point we will be looking at inflation unlike anything we have ever seen before.  The era of cheap imports will be over and we will pay far more for everything from oil to the foreign-made plastic trinkets that we buy at Wal-Mart.

Most Americans don’t even know what a “reserve currency” is, but when the U.S. dollar loses reserve currency status it is going to unleash a nightmare that most economists cannot even imagine.

So enjoy this holiday season while you can.  There are still lots and lots of cheap imports filling the shelves of our stores.

Once the coming giant currency superstorm strikes, we will dearly wish for the good old days of 2012.

Yes, the U.S. dollar is alive and ticking for now.  But at the pace that our authorities are abusing it, I would not say that things are looking good for a long and healthy lifespan.

Currency Superstorm

Disarming The American People: Here’s How It Will Be Done!

November 29th, 2012 by



By Truther

Incrementalism has proved depressingly effective as a tool for getting most people to quietly surrender their rights piecemeal. For gradually habituating them to an ever-diminishing circle of liberty. When the circle finally closes and their rights no longer exist at all, they hardly notice – because by that time, most of their rights have already been taken.

The final surrender is met with a shrug rather than a scream of outrage.

Think how Americans have been habituated to arbitrary search and seizure. Something like the TSA would simply not have been tolerated if it came out of the blue sky circa 1980. And no, the terrr attacks ofnineleven did not “change everything.” Getting people to accept “sobriety checkpoints” beginning around 1980 changed everything. Accept that – and something like Gate Rape is inevitable.

The same process works just as well when it comes to dismantling due process – and removing limits on what the government may not do to us. We didn’t get to legal strip searches for jaywalking or littering in one fell swoop. Nor rendition, torture as policy – and presidential kill lists. It is a matter of getting them – getting us – to  tolerate “A” so that “B” will be accepted in turn.

This is how the citizens of the United States will be disarmed.

No sudden, mass ban or attempt at confiscation – because that would probably lead to open violence on a large scale and they – people like Dear Leader Obama and his Vyshinsky, AG Eric Holder, know this.

So, instead, they will first pass “reasonable” restrictions.

They will target not guns – just dangerous guns. So easy to demagogue anything with, say, a high-capacity magazine. Or which looks “military.” Think how the ground has already been ceded by mainstream “gun rights” groups like the NRA – which invariably talk about “sportsmen” and “hunting.” Who needs an AR-15 (or Sig 220) to hunt?

Open carry will be next. How many millions of Clovers would support a ban?

Next, they’ll lobby for a new law (or just issue a fatwa) that makes it much harder to get a CC permit. Such as at a judge’s discretion. And only if you have a “legitimate” purpose. Self-defense will not be considered a legitimate purpose.

But the big one – tied to Obamacare – will be the transformation of gun ownership into a public health issue.

The assault on smoking (and lately, soft drinks) should have alerted people – but as with “sobriety checkpoints,” most people readily supported the imposition of massive taxes on smokers because, after all, it is unhealthy to smoke. And of course, they didn’t smoke. So their rights were not on the table (foolish them). They – most people – never see that an attack on anyone’s rights is an attack on their rights.They are easily gulled by their moralistic fetishes – their disapproval of some concrete thing other people do which they don’t like. Not seeing that if the government can ban (or control or regulate) this than it certainly can ban, control or regulate that. The particulars don’t matter. The principle is everything.

Thus, smoking has been anathematized – and rendered exorbitantly expensive to partake of. Not an outright ban – not yet. But ever closer, every year.

And guns? It will be argued it is unhealthy to have a gun in the house. There will be talk of all the suicides and domestic violence (red herrings, these – but exceptionally effective tools of emotional manipulation).

Inevitably, the children will come into play.

It will be argued that anyone who possesses a gun must also possess insurance. Just as car owners are required to buy insurance; just as we are soon to be forced to buy health insurance. The same arguments will be used – because they’ve already been accepted. Thus, just as it is not illegal to have a car – so long as you buy insurance for it – it will not be illegal (yet) to own a gun. So long as you are “properly insured.”

That will be the first step.

The second step ought to be obvious. Legal gun ownership will rendered increasingly unaffordable.

As with collectivized car and health insurance, the insurance you will be forced to buy in order to keep a gun will be based on the costs imposed by the collective. It will not matter that you handle your gun safely. Because others have not, you will be made to pay.

People can afford to buy a $500 rifle or pistol. How many will be able to afford paying $500 a year to lawfully keep that rifle or pistol? How many will be able to afford keeping more than one rifle or pistol? Can you see where this is headed? Is it not brilliant in its subtlety?



Insurance costs have already proved their effectiveness at limiting the number of vehicles the average person can afford to keep. I’ve written before about the effect mandatory insurance has had on hobbyists. It used to be easy (and legal) to keep a “parts car” or “project car” because other than the costs of buying it and fixing it up, there were no other costs. So long as you didn’t put it on the road, you didn’t have to insure it. In numerous areas around the country, you must now keep valid tags – and insurance – on every single vehicle, even those kept in a garage or in your back yard. If not, the vehicle is subject to confiscation.

Exactly the same tactics will be deployed against firearms. And it will be impossible to fight – because the fight over the principle was lost long ago. How will anyone argue against mandatory gun insurance when they have already accepted mandatory car insurance and now mandatory health insurance?

In a very short time, the government will have effectively disarmed most people without ever having had to push for an outright ban. The small handful of people who still possess arms will only be able to possess a few types and be very limited in what they can (legally) do with them.

Dealing with them will easy. Because there will be so few.

And because they will have already conceded the point anyhow.

Throw it in the Woods?





Global Growth Woes – Here Is Where the Blame Lies

November 28th, 2012 by


By: Michael Ivanovitch

President, MSI Global

When, towards the end of World War II, the British economist John Maynard Keynes led his country’s delegation to negotiate in Bretton Woods the IMF’s charter (articles of agreement), he argued that the stability of the international monetary system and world economy required that surplus and deficit countries should be held equally responsible to balance their trade accounts.

Keynes feared that America, relatively unscathed after nearly five years of brutal conflict, would be flooding Europe with its exports, creating a shortage of dollars and obstructing the recovery of a starving and war-ravaged continent.

As it turned out, Keynes’s worries about the possibility that America would selfishly pursue mercantilist policies were misplaced. Washington quickly moved to help Europe get back on its feet with a $13 billion Marshall Plan (formally known as the European Recovery Program) and kept its markets open for European goods and services.

During the three years of the Marshall Plan, the economies of 17 European countries benefiting from its assistance grew between 15 percent and 20 percent, and, largely as a result of growing imports from Europe, the U.S. trade balance recorded its first postwar trade deficit of $2.3 billion (0.2 percent of GDP) in 1971.

The US Remains Engine of World Economy

The U.S. is still the largest buyer of goods and services produced around the world. In the first nine months of this year, America’s trade deficit with China, Japan and Germany accounted for nearly two-thirds of its $559 billion trade gap. 

Keynes must be turning in his grave: Even with a feeble 2.3 percent GDP growth, America is the engine of world economy, while the second, third and fourth-largest world economies are living off their trade surpluses with the U.S. and the rest of the world.

Those wondering about what went wrong with the world economy should look no further. With their huge trade surpluses, ranging from $86 billion (Japan) to $217 billion (Germany), these three countries – one-fourth of world GDP – are making no net contribution to global economic growth.  Worse: they are, in fact, a drag on world economy.

And there is no end to this. Almost by design, Japan and Germany are export-led economies. Neither country wants to abandon this growth strategy by generating more demand and output from their domestic spending. China apparently wants to get off the export bandwagon, but it will take some time to significantly change the composition of its economic growth.

Japan’s Structurally Weak Domestic Demand

In terms of Keynes’s argument for symmetry in trade adjustment obligations of deficit and surplus countries, Japan has been – and still is – the most difficult case. Over the last 10 years, for example, about one-half of Japan’s economic growth came from its trade surpluses.  During that period, exports – 8 percent of GDP – grew at an average annual rate of 6 percent, while household consumption – 60 percent of GDP – edged up only 0.9 percent.

These numbers clearly show that it is almost impossible to grow on the basis of domestic demand if its largest component is in virtual stagnation. And Tokyo is not doing much to change that. Ever since the “bubble economy” burst in the early 1990s, a succession of Japanese governments chose to finance public sector investments – about 4 percent of GDP – by building the proverbial “bridges and highways to nowhere” instead of stimulating household consumption. No wonder the economy largely stagnated over the last 20 years with an average annual growth of less than 1 percent.

(Read More: What Will Save the Japanese Economy?)

Admittedly, it is difficult to stimulate private consumption in an economy with declining and rapidly aging population. A study, published last January by Japan's National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, forecasts that the country's population will shrink by one-third over the next 50 years as a result of an alarmingly low birthrate of 1.39 per woman of childbearing age. The study also shows that, at this point, it looks like a mission impossible to even slow down the population decline, because Japan would have to raise its birthrate to 2.1 per woman.

It is obvious that to stabilize the economy Japan would have to address, with a great sense of urgency, the problem of its worsening demography. Only a steadily rising trend in net family formation and birthrates would underpin private consumption and residential investment (63 percent of GDP) to gradually wean the economy off its excessive dependence on export sales.

But that, unfortunately, does not seem likely anytime soon. Barring more dangerous developments in Sino-Japanese relations, Japan’s sinking exports to China (down 14 percent in the year to September) will just be dumped somewhere else.

China’s Slowly Changing Growth Patterns 

China will probably do better than Japan in changing the current structure of its economy.  With an apparent determination to anchor economic growth around household consumption and investments, Beijing wants to minimize trade frictions with the U.S. and Europe as it becomes one of the key players in world commerce and finance.

These changes will take time, though. One has to remember that most of China’s manufacturing sector was set up to serve exports, based on low wages and a favorable tax treatment of joint ventures with foreign companies. 

Still, some important changes are happening already. Rapidly escalating wage and non-wage labor costs are making China increasingly expensive as a manufacturing export base. Some European companies are even repatriating their manufacturing from China due to the shortage – and rapidly rising costs – of skilled labor.

China’s current growth patterns are also likely to change as the planned reduction of large income inequalities and a more extensive welfare system – two of China’s new leader’s top priorities – are likely to stimulate household consumption (a relatively small 35 percent of GDP) since families would have to save less for education, healthcare and retirement.

(Read More: Why China’s New Conservative Leaders Will Be Reformists)

And while these structural changes are taking hold, China’s trading partners could sell more of their products and services by insisting on better access to Chinese markets. Beijing will have to yield because its own companies are seeking to establish trading and manufacturing positions in various countries around the world.

Obama’s Wrong Number in Europe

While China’s large trade surpluses are a relatively recent problem, Germany’s systematically export-led economy has been a destabilizing factor for Europe and the rest of the world since the early 1970s.

(Read More: Why the US-China Trade Spat Is Just Political Posturing)

President Obama learned all about it when he was trying to rev up the U.S. economy during his election campaign. Apparently thinking that he solved former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s old riddle – “Who do I call if I want to call Europe” – Obama hit the wall when he rang up that number in Berlin to ask for less austerity and more economic stimulus to protect one-fifth of American exports to the E.U.

Not only did the German Chancellor Merkel refuse to oblige, but she also haughtily dismissed American entreaties by saying that “it made no sense to be adding new debt to old debt.” And all that from a lady Obama decorated with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, America’s highest civilian honor, in June 2011.

But Obama was right to ask Germany to buy more from its trading partners, because Germany had plenty of room to stimulate the economy and stop living off the rest of the world. With a virtually balanced budget, record trade surpluses (6 percent of GDP), stable and low inflation, and borrowing costs of its public sector at a record-low 1.3 percent, Germany should temper its austerity mantra and buy more goods and services from some of the hard-pressed and heavily indebted euro zone countries.


Germany, of course, won’t do that. A low unemployment rate, and a relatively placid social scene, will again allow Germany to ride out the euro zone recession on the back of exports.

Don’t Hold Your Breath for the G20

What can be done about the fact that 25 percent of the world economy makes no net contribution to global economic growth and acts as a drag on the economies of its trading partners?  The answer is: not much, if anything.

The irony is that the world has a forum to deal with such problems. The G20 – a group of the world’s 20 leading economies, representing 90 percent of global GDP and two-thirds of the world population – has been set up to promote economic growth through better coordination of economic policies. In other words, through policies designed to reduce destabilizing trade imbalances in the world economy.

The need to implement better coordination of macroeconomic policies was one of the key decisions of the G20 meeting in the Mexican resort of Los Cabos last June. And what happened?

The G20 sherpas (representatives of the heads of state and government) had nothing to say about that when they met in late October to monitor the implementation of their bosses’ decisions, because there were no coordinated policy measures to support the weakening world economy undermined by excessively unbalanced trade flows.

The sherpas nevertheless congratulated themselves on the “good work” and passed the baton to Russians who will take on the G20 presidency next January.

But expect no more to be done in the imperial splendor of Saint-Petersburg’s Constantin Palace in September 2013 than the repeat of empty talk – at great taxpayers’ expense – of previous meetings.

That will suit Beijing, Tokyo and Berlin just fine. As in the past, they know they can bet on one thing and win: Driven by an extraordinarily loose monetary policy, the U.S. economy will continue to be their main export market for the foreseeable future.

Michael Ivanovitch is president of MSI Global, a New York-based economic research company.  He also served as a senior economist at the OECD in Paris, international economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and taught economics at Columbia

© 2012 CNBC.com



Capitalism, Socialism and Human Dignity

November 26th, 2012 by

As Published at the Daily Bell





Capitalism means human individual freedom, especially in the sphere of striving to become prosperous. To defend the system is a challenge because of its ties to individualism, even ethical egoism. For centuries the ethical and moral guidelines people have been urged to live by have been some kind of communitarianism, such as altruism, utilitarianism, socialismcommunism, etc. The individualism associated with capitalism had been thought as atomistic, seeing people as isolated from and indeed hostile toward one another.

Socialism is the political economic order that sees human beings as part of a larger entity, society, to which they are all beholden and which they must serve not of their own free will but as a matter of coerced duty.

The common sense appeal of communal systems as guiding human action comes from the historical need for collective conduct in the face of threats from groups that would overpower those who are vulnerable. (F. A. Hayekmakes this point well in his works.) Once it turned out that individuals who unite of their free will provide better protection to the group, individualism began to gain support. It is better suited to human life, with individuals being the source of solutions to most problems.

In time individualism surpassed other schools of ethical thought, especially once it became evident that voluntarily choosing to be part of a group − tribe, clan, nation − ensured greater loyalty than is possible via coercive unisons.

It also became evident that all the talk about the need to unite and sacrifice for the group has served largely to secure power for a few over the rest. Thus individualism became more civilized, less primitive. As public choice theory suggests, efforts to serve the public interest usually come to no more than serving the interest of influential, powerful people at the expense of others.

Protesting about having to serve the public or community is difficult because the alternative, of serving oneself, the individual, seems to be arbitrary and self-indulgent. But today a sophisticated ethical (as opposed to psychological) egoism, such as what we find in David L. Norton's Personal Destinies, A Philosophy of Ethical Individualism(Princeton UP, 1976), can overcome all known objections to individualism. (See, also, Tibor Machan's Classical Individualism [Routledge, 1998].) This, however, hasn't reached popular consciousness. Iinstead, most people are schizophrenic and preach collectivism while practicing individualism.

The individualism or egoism forged most fully by Norton, as well as by Ayn Rand in her book, The Virtue ofSelfishness, A New Concept of Egoism (1967), and others, stresses an Aristotelian idea of the human individual, not a Hobbesian one (which is found mostly in economics). An implication of this is that virtues such as generosity, kindness, gregariousness, etc., are entirely compatible with seeking to flourish as the human individual one is and self-interest is understood by reference to what is proper for a rational animal, not a beast driven to seek power over others.

This development, though not yet widely acknowledged, puts an end to the charge that egoism or individualism, as a central element of free market capitalism, must be a crass, anti-social viewpoint and must generate a social climate of mutual hostility and alienation.

When it comes to competition in the free market, for example, the model isn't the boxing ring, as widely assumed in caricatures of capitalism, but the marathon race! Thus, for instance, friendship would easily be seen as fully compatible with individualism, indeed, implicit in it. (See also the work of the philosopher Neera Badhwar for this.)

The dignity of the human individual is far more elevated than that of the human social animal as seen in socialism and other collectivist political regimes. The hallmark of this social-political outlook is that individuals come together voluntarily and aren't herded into communities by rulers or dictators.

Based on a lecture given at the Summer Leadership Academy, in Bercel, Hungary, Summer 2012. Tibor Machan is the R. C. Hoiles Professor of Business Ethics & Free Enterprise at the Argyros School of Business & Economics, Chapman University, Orange, CA 92866.


I admit that the words (Human Dignity) caught my eye while searching for today’s post because that is the most desired attribute of a society, as there is no real human dignity in any form of human relationships that impose generosity as a matter of responsibility. I either give freely, or not at all, and have no shame from judging who is worthy, and who is not. I have had too many men working for me in my life not to opine who earned their wage and who did not. I maintain that it is the prerogative of the employer to set the level of compensation, and the responsibility of the worker to accept or reject it. Once accepted, I expect the worker to get the job done right, as fast as possible without burning himself out, or risking injury. After all, IT’S MY MONEY! All other forms of communitarianism are for the dull and ignorant who refuse to accept responsibility for their actions, and have no self-respect.

Whenever I have worked for another man, I gave him more than he paid me as a matter of principal. Those people who have never performed manual labor in their life always seem to be the first to impose responsibility on others. Have you ever known a politician with a callus on his hands? 




NDAA 2013 Lets Identify The Traitors to The US Constitution

November 24th, 2012 by

NOTE: Please go to this link and watch the Rand Paul video. Activist Post

By Eric Blair

By now anyone who pays attention to politics knows that the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012 contained a provision that allows for the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without charge or trial.

Section 1021 of the 2012 NDAA states that anyone suspected of being involved in terrorism or “belligerent acts” against the U.S. can be detained by the military under the so-called Authorization for Use of Military Force, including American citizens.

In other words, the war on terror has been officially declared on U.S. soil and everyone is now considered a potential combatant in this war.

Senator Lindsey Graham pretty much summed it up when he said, "The homeland is part of the battlefield and people can be held without trial whether an American citizen or not."

Even though this clause is a direct violation of citizen's rights under the 6th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, there was scarcely any dissent and hardly a peep from the corporate media when Obama signed it into law under the cover of darkness late on New Year's Eve 2011.

This year Senator Rand Paul once again blocked the passage of the NDAA for 2013, which the Senate hoped to rush through before the Thanksgiving recess. Using a filibuster, Paul is attempting to force a vote on his amendment to exempt American citizens from the indefinite detention clause.

Rand Paul's amendment simply reaffirms the 6th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

A citizen of the United States who is captured or arrested in the United States and detained by the Armed Forces of the United States pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40) shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Compare that to the 6th Amendment of the Constitution:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

It's sad that it is so difficult to get elected officials to debate, let alone vote on, legislation that is in direct violation to the Constitution that they swore an oath to uphold. But these are certainly Orwellian times where normal thinking no longer applies.

As Rand Paul points out in the video below about the 2012 NDAA vote, “The senate voted 55 to 45 to allow indefinite detention of US citizens without jury trial. We have become Orwellian without even knowing it.”

When the Senate resumes after recess, the NDAA 2013 will likely pass even with a recorded vote on Paul's amendment, but at least the traitors will put themselves on display for all to see. 

If there are any true oath keepers in positions of power, this would be a perfect time to arrest those who vote against this amendment. Their treason to the Constitution couldn't be any clearer.


FREEDOM from tyrannical governance, is not a gift, it is the product of men willing to give their life through constant battle with those who seek power in government. (Olddog) One does not obtain freedom by pursuing riches or entertainment; it is taken by force and held onto like it’s a life preserver in the oceans storms. It’s the food that nourishes your children’s bodies and mind. It is the one single thing that gives your aging parents comfort as their strength deserts them. Call you congress critters and senators, and tell them to support Rand Paul’s fight for freedom, or you will spend the rest of your life denigrating their name. Tell them you will pray for the Lord God to curse them and their families, and make them terrified to walk the streets of America. Talk to them like they are the scum of the earth if they support  the NDAA-2012. Always remember, to judge a politician by what they do, and not by what they say.




November 23rd, 2012 by

WASHINGTON (Reuters) –

The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States. The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations.

By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress. Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments.

These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms. It will never happen!

The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws.

Does that mean Obama is telling the truth?

What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public.

We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership.

And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.

This is not a joke nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control.

Please forward this message to others who may be concerned about the direction in which our country is headed. Straight into socialism if Obama has his way…

We are being led like a lamb to the slaughter (Socialism/Dictatorship).


I fully realize that people who do not study the issues that have affected the demise of freedom in America, are loathe to believe that America could once again crumble into social division, where brothers kill one another, and I admit that until I diligently studied these issues, it was inconceivable to me that family and real friends could ever murder one another. NOT ANYMORE!

My eyes have been opened by learning just how despicable it is to force a one size fits all political opinion on everyone. Especially, when it makes so much sense to peacefully separate. I can find absolutely nothing-illogical about two people separating when their world-views are incompatible. So, to take away my ability to defend my person is only going to happen after I’m dead, and have taken several enemies with me. You can take that to the bank! It has happened before, and it will happen again, right here in the good ole U.S.A.

By keeping up the present rush to equip yourself with weapons and ammo, you will be making a national statement that cannot, and will not be ignored.

Some may say that I am happy to end this elusion of solidarity in America, but they have little idea how big the lie is, that we ever had it. And when I discovered that American’s had been beguiled from the get go, it produced a grief in me that will never go away. Simply because I had bought the lie too!

Loving the American elusion is like loving an unfaithful wife and son. We have never governed America, and we never will. Self-government is an elusion that is as attractive as having the most beautiful woman alive, and just as impossible to obtain. The best we can do is to try to protect our politicians from the International Investment Bankers and their corporations, and only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can accomplish that, which is something that has never existed, or ever will.

When the SHTF, you’ll need a gun in your hand!



Obamas Gun Ban List Is Out

November 22nd, 2012 by


By Alan Korwin – Author Gun Laws Of America

Here it is, folks, and it is bad news. The framework for legislation is always laid, and the Democrats have the votes to pass anything they want to impose upon us. They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family. Look at the list and see how many you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did.

Remember, the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.

Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady’s plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity. It’s horrific.

They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical.

Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states’ rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment.

The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):

Rifles (or copies or duplicates): M1 Carbine, Sturm Ruger Mini-14, AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, AR-10, Thompson 1927, Thompson M1; AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR; Olympic Arms PCR; AR70, Calico Liberty , Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU, Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC, Hi-Point20Carbine, HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, HK-PSG-1, Thompson 1927 Commando, Kel-Tec Sub Rifle; Saiga, SAR-8, SAR-4800, SKS with detachable magazine, SLG 95, SLR 95 or 96, Steyr AU, Tavor, Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).

Pistols (or copies or duplicates): Calico M-110, MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3, Olympic Arms OA, TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10, Uzi.

Shotguns (or copies or duplicates): Armscor 30 BG, SPAS 12 or LAW 12, Striker 12, Streetsweeper.

Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs): A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has: (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below), (iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.

Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).

A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has: (i) a second pistol grip, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a barrel shroud or (iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and (v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.

A semiautomatic shotgun with: (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a pistol grip (see definition below), (iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and (iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder. Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.

Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.”

Note that Obama’s pick for this office, Eric Holder, wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home. In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.” In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose —is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.

Respectfully submitted, Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America http://www.gunlaws.com/gloa.htm

Forward or send to every gun owner you know… Watch This, If You Want More Proof: YouTube – CNN- Obama To BAN Guns

SPREAD THIS FOLKS, PLZ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv3p2lLmjGk

A partial list of gun rights groups:

Gun Owners of America http://gunowners.org/
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership http://www.jpfo.org/

FREEDOM=GUNS http://www.tcsn.net/doncicci/freedom.htm

National Rifle Association http://www.nra.org/

Second Amendment Committee http://www.libertygunrights.com/

Second Amendment Foundation http://www.saf.org/

Second Amendment Sisters http://www.2asisters.org/

Women Against Gun Control http://www.wagc.com


I get asked this all the time.
People are frustrated with the infringements and abuses they see growing.

Do you want to fight back? Chip in? Have an effect?

If you want to help protect our gun rights, and freedom in general,
you can get started right now. It's easy.

Your state gun-rights group is listed in our National Directory (blue button on home page) — JOIN if you haven’t already, go to meetings, volunteer — that's really doing something — and you start having a real effect (plus it’s fun). Write the check. Join one of the many national gun-rights groups while you're at it, to increase your clout — and their power. And check this out if you're in my home state of Arizona.

Read and learn more, like, now. Do you feel powerless? Learn how to be more effective than you are. Take a look at my Politically Corrected Glossary, or the yellow Position Papers button on home page, for ideas you can use. This helps you talk the talk. Take a look at out our books on state gun rights for even more ideas. Find out more about why gun politics works the way it does. Learn about the Heller Case and the protections it has for the right to keep and bear arms. Read Jon Haupt's fabulous Five Minutes to Freedom brochure for free. 

Important: Build up your email list so you can forward important news to people you know. I have to tell you this? They can make phone calls, get active, and help the cause (you have my permission to forward anything I circulate, or anything on this site). Political action is rapidly becoming an email thing. Get real ambitious and make an e-list of all your legislators from my directory or the tool at the NRA or GOA, and here's the list journalists recommend. Now there's a great thing to have. Do the same for radio, TV and printed news in your town, they provide their eddresses if you just look — compile your own press list. Hey, I'll take a copy of any news media contacts you have, and put it to good use, send yours to me! Please.

Learn how to watch your own state legislature online for any gun or freedom-oriented bills you need to know about (and email the news to your friends). Dress nicely on a day (wear a tie??!) and actually attend a state legislative session or especially a committee meeting to see how it works. Get alerts automatically on proposed federal gun laws, with easy ways to contact Congress.

Go to lunch or dinner once a month with like-minded friends and focus your whole conversation on, "What can we do to protect our gun rights and expand freedom in our own community?" This is so powerful, so easy, and the results will surprise you. Go to dinner, it's the right to assemble, so important it's in the First Amendment. Come up with something you can actually do, and go do it. Visit your representatives and let them know what you think. Personal appearances have real impact

Check out the blue Billboards button on our home page for a great idea that will affect the public, at a modest cost. Also from our home page, download, print and ask your own state legislator to introduce the Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act, or the High School Marksmanship Act, or the Private Property Protection Act. Model legislation makes it easy for legislators to do the right thing. Try it. 

Take someone to the range and enjoy some safe shooting. Anyone. Take a journalist, your doctor, dentist, teacher, relative or anyone who has never been, and show them how much fun it is, how it isn't connected to crime, how other people — just like themselves — go to the range and it is good clean American sport. Always start newcomers with a .22, and be careful not to scare anyone off with a cannon-caliber the first time out (a bad mistake some macho types make, it can permanently scare off some people). Oh, and bring extra ammo, everyone always asks for it.

Increasingly unpopular among freedom-oriented people is the voting process. It seems hopeless, nothing changes, what can one vote do… But elections DO matter, as you can see in the current Obama administration. And people who think like we do far outnumber the takings coalition, but they got their numbers out, and beat us by a mere 3-1/2% spread in the national popular vote for president in 2008.Register your like-minded friends and get them to the polls. Ask a group you're part of to organize a registration drive. Radical thought, eh? Want to make sure your candidate choices are better? Become a precinct committeeman. What's that? Go find out.

Is that enough for a start?
Will you actually get up and 
do something… anything?
You can make a difference, and enjoy yourself.
Get to it!





November 22nd, 2012 by

By Olddog


This diatribe is primarily, but not exclusively directed at those ignorant scumbags who voted for Obama, as there are still many classes of human scum who deserve the same mind whipping.

The ability to divorce a government or any other group, regardless of contract, when said contract empowers another to make your life a living hell, is not a right any sane person would give up, even up too, and including death. And, when a government denies we have any rights, they can go to hell.

Unlawful Constitutional revisions be damned!

What most all of the scumbags opposing secession don’t seem to understand is it’s not just the government we want to separate from, it’s also the most putrid form of humanity to ever walk the earth, namely, the people who think the sun shines in Obama’s ass, and have not the intelligence to learn that this federal government is not ruled by their petty desires, but by the International Banking Cartel. See:

  29 Signs That The Elite Are Transforming Society Into A Total Domination Control Grid and hundreds of other articles on http://anationbeguiled.com And  http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com

Never think that this secession movement is because of the recent election, and don’t make the stupid mistake that we believe it will induce a peaceful separation, because we don’t for a minute think it will. We did this simply to show the Bastard we are not afraid to have our names added to his kill list, and to rub our defiance in his face.

It’s kind of like telling the enemy general’s aid when delivering a demand for our surrender, to go back and tell his superior to Go Fuck His Self.

What do you dumb asses think they put that web site up for? They want proof of identity of those who still have enough balls to complain. They don’t give a shit what your complaint is, they just want to know WHO has the guts to complain, because they are terrified of self-reliant subjects.

After all, what would happen if we discovered a leader we all trusted?

They could care less about us, or our complaints, all they really want is to get a kill list established of the more vocal of us who want a government and society that is compatible with freedom of expression and living a life free from being told how we must wipe our ass. For Christ sake people! Do you really want a f*^king government that demands and claims ownership of your children? That steals your wealth? That murders anyone who they disagree with?

What you assholes really do not understand is, it’s you who approve of this kind of governance that we want to be free from, because no democracy with people like you in it will ever be a free and safe place to live in.

Read the articles I have collected, and learn what it is that free men hate with an uncompromising passion.

http://anationbeguiled.com  and http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.co




Secession in These Unites States

November 21st, 2012 by


BY C.L. from Montana


In response to the article involving the constitutionality of secession, a few other points to consider to perhaps gain a clearer view of the secession situation.  Understanding the individual states sovereignty in relation to the United states government is crucial.
1.  Abraham Lincoln claimed that the Union preceded the states which gave the Federal government authority over the states.  This view is incorrect as the original 13 colonies adopted the Articles of Confederation in which each state retained its freedom, independence, and sovereignty.  Each state delegated a portion of its sovereignty to the Union, thereby making the Union a creature of the state, not the other way around.  Further each state was by name acknowledged as free, independent, and sovereign in the Treaty of Paris in 1783.
2.  Sovereignty is indivisible.  A portion of a states authority, or power may be delegated as is seen in the 9th and 10th amendments to the Constitution.  But the sovereign state retains the right to recall its authority otherwise it is no longer sovereign.  "The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."- 10th amendment. In Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) the court found "To the Constitution of the United States the term sovereign, is totally unknown.  There is but one place where it could have been used with propriety.  But, even in that place it would not, perhaps, have comported with the delicacy of those, who ordained and established that Constitution.  They might have announced themselves "sovereign" people of the United States:  But serenely conscious of the fact, they avoided the ostentatious declaration….Let a State be considered as subordinate to the People:  But let every thing else be subordinate to the State".- Chisolm v. Georgia, 2 US 419
3.  Shortly after the ratification of the Constitution, the federal government began its encroachment upon the states.  With the passage of the Sedition Act in 1798,  Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, (creator of the Virginia plan which evolved into the Constitution), were asked by the state of Kentucky and Virginia to  author the "Kentucky and Virginia Resolves of 1798" which nullified the enforcement of the Sedition Act within their states.  All three branches of the Federal government had conspired against the people of the states in violating their right to freedom of speech and press.  The sovereign authority of the states of Kentucky and Virginia interposed between the citizens of these states and the Federal government.
4.  For those states which were admitted into the Union who were not participants in the ratification, the equal footing doctrine would apply basically stating that all states shared the same powers and sovereignty as the original thirteen.  See: Pollard v. Hagan, and Permoli v. First Municipality of New Orleans.
5.  This now brings us to Texas v. White.  This case was decided on a 5-3 vote.  The 5 who voted as a majority were Lincoln appointees.  One of the three dissenters Justice Robert Cooper Grier, an appointee to the court by President Polk in 1846, called Chief Justice Chases opinion a "legal fiction" as he considered Texas to not be a state in the union at the time this case was being decided.  Further  Chief Justice Chase should have recused himself from this case do to himself being involved in the case in 1862 as secretary of the treasury.  There are many more details involved in this case in which one who is interested in further details should consult John Avery Emison, Ph.D. book called Lincoln Über Alles: Dictatorship Comes to AmericaSECESSION.
In conclusion,  as one searches out the true history of the formation of our Federal government through the eyes of the anti-federalists who foretold with incredible accuracy the results of adopting this contract known as the Constitution with its inherent flaws, one of which would be a supreme court which could interpret its own actions and laws within itself.  A court which eventually saw its actions as sovereign having no higher authority to hold them in check.  Is it any wonder that we should have such absurd decisions as that found in Texas v. White, which become the foundation for the premise of secession as being unconstitutional or at the very least, the supreme court being accepted as having jurisdiction in this area which has not been delegated to them by the states?  I would think that we have been swindled into the notion of thinking of secession as a "rebellion" and  should rather view it as a God given right which is protected under the 9th and 10th amendment to our Constitution.  In contrast the terms and phraseology used to characterize the actions of the Federal government over the past 150 years I'll leave for the reader to decide. – C.L. from Montana 


Here are some questions for the dull and ignorant that should be contemplated as deep as your intellect can venture.

If you cannot leave a lifestyle you hate, are you free? If your government declares what you should eat, and how much, are you free. If your government decides how warm or cool your home should be, are you free? If your government intrudes on you private communications, are you free? Most people who cannot bear to read more than one sentence if it does not make them laugh, would not have read this far so, let me ask you who are still reading if you have the guts to do anything about this situation? The ability to divorce your government when it becomes intolerable is the most precious right you have! It’s not your government you should love, it’s your freedom!



By Sheriff Jim R. Schwiesow, Ret.
November 21, 2012

Today I picked up the newspaper and was struck by the following title lead-in to an article in regard to the election results; it said:


It means that the liberal progressives have succeeded with their kindergarten thru college socialist/progressive indoctrination endeavors. It means that we, the people were too stupidly caught up in our mundane lives to push back to such an inimical neo communist stratagem. It was a contrivance that was very useful to the socialists and the death knell for a once great Constitutional Republic.

It meant that a corrupted and ignorant youth with ultra pliable minds grew into corrupted adults. It means that now, in this nation, the takers are on par and dead even with the givers. It means the absolute end to this nation; it is just a matter of a short amount of time. This nation is dead, it just refuses to fall over and be buried as it should be, given that it is no longer useful to any righteous intent or purpose.

Do I care? You're damn tootin' I do. I served in the American Military and was greatly proud to be able to do so, such is not the case anymore if I were young enough to be asked, "I would tell whoever asked to stick it." What will be done when none will be willing to take arms in defense of this nation?


It means that legalized euthanasia and infanticide can rage in the absence of any ethics or morals. It means that taxation without representation in this nation is the norm, and that the people no longer rule, but are subject to a totalitarian government. It means that vice and moral weakness has supplanted that which is good, moral, worthy, innocent, and just.

It means that our ass is grass and the progressive government is the lawn mower, when they pass over you they will sing, "so long suckers…we won, you lost."

And that dear reader is what it means. Take refuge in the Lord; He is your only escape from this demonically structured nation.

© 2012 – Jim R. Schwiesow – All Rights Reserved



September 11 2001 The Crimes of War Committed In the Name of 9 11

November 19th, 2012 by



By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research,

September 11, 2001: The Crimes of War Committed “in the Name of 9/11″

Initiating a Legal Procedure against the Perpetrators of 9/11

International Conference on “9/11 Revisited – Seeking the Truth”

Perdana Global Peace Foundation (PGPF)

Kuala Lumpur, November 2012


The tragic events of September 11, 2001 constitute a fundamental landmark in American history, a decisive watershed, a breaking point. Millions of people have been misled regarding the causes and consequences of 9/11.

September 11 2001 opens up an era of crisis, upheaval and militarization of American society. The post September 11, 2001 era is marked by the outright criminalization of the US State, including its judicial, foreign policy, national security and intelligence apparatus.

9/11 marks the onslaught of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), used as a pretext and a justification by the US and its NATO allies to carry out a “war without borders”, a global war of conquest.

A far-reaching overhaul of US military doctrine was launched in the wake of 9/11.

9/11 was also a stepping stone towards the relentless repeal of civil liberties, the militarization of law enforcement and the inauguration of “Police State USA”.

In assessing the crimes associated with 9/11 in the context of a legal procedure, we must distinguish between those associated with the actual event, namely the loss of life and the destruction of property, from the crimes committed in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 “in the name of 9/11″. The latter build upon the former. We are dealing with two related dimensions of criminality. The crimes committed in the name of 9/11 involving acts of war are far-reaching, resulting in the deaths of millions of people as well as the destruction of entire countries.

The 9/11 event in itself– which becomes symbolic– is used to justify the onslaught of the post 9/11 US-NATO military agenda, under the banner of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), not to mention the ushering in of the Homeland police state and the repeal of civil liberties.

The crimes committed in the name of 9/11 broadly consist in two intimately related processes:

1. The launching of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), used as a pretext and a justification to Wage a War of Conquest. This GWOT mandate was used to justify the 2001 and 2003 invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The GWOT mandate has since extended its grip to a large number of countries in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, where the US and its NATO allies are intervening selectively under a counterterrorism mandate.

2. The derogation of civil liberties and the instatement of an Orwellian police state apparatus within Western countries. In the US, the introduction of the PATRIOT legislation and the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks set the stage for the subsequent restructuring of the judicial and law enforcement apparatus, culminating in the legalisation of extrajudicial assassinations under an alleged counter-terrorism mandate.

The 9/11 attacks constitute what is referred to in intelligence parlance to as a “massive casualty producing event” conducive to the deaths of civilians.

The dramatic loss of life on the morning of 9/11 resulting from an initial criminal act is used as a pretext and a justification to wage an all out war of retribution, in the name of 9/11 against the alleged perpetrators of 9/11, namely the “state sponsors of terrorism”, including Afghanistan, Iraq as well as Iran.

We are dealing with a diabolical and criminal project. The civilian deaths resulting from the 911 attacks are an instrument of war propaganda, applied to build a consensus in favor of an outright war of global domination.

The perpetrators of war propaganda are complicit in the conduct of extensive war crimes, in that they readily justify acts of war as counter-terrorism and/or humanitarian operations (R2P) launched to protect civilians.

The “Just War” (Jus ad Bellum) concept prevails: The killing of civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq are “rightfully” undertaken in retribution for the deaths incurred on 9/11.

Evidence is fabricated to the effect that the “state sponsors of terrorism” had committed, on the morning of 9/11, an outright act of war against the United States.

Realities are turned upside down. The US and its allies are the victims of foreign aggression. America’s crimes of war in Afghanistan and Iraq are committed in the name of 9/11 under a counter terrorism mandate.

The 9/11 attacks are used to harness public opinion into supporting a war without borders. Endless wars of aggression under the humanitarian cloak of “counter-terrorism” are set in motion. 

Chronology of Events

At eleven o’clock, on the morning of September 11, the Bush administration had already announced that Al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) and the Pentagon. This assertion was made prior to the conduct of an in-depth police investigation.

CIA Director George Tenet stated that same morning that Osama bin Laden had the capacity to plan “multiple attacks with little or no warning.”

Secretary of State Colin Powell called the attacks “an act of war” and President Bush confirmed in an evening televised address to the Nation that he would “make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those [foreign governments] who harbor them”.

Former CIA Director James Woolsey, without mentioning Afghanistan, pointed his finger at “state sponsorship,” implying the complicity of one or more foreign governments. In the words of former National Security Adviser, Lawrence Eagleburger, “I think we will show when we get attacked like this, we are terrible in our strength and in our retribution.”

That same evening at 9:30 pm, a “War Cabinet” was formed integrated by a select number of top intelligence and military advisors. And at 11:00 pm, at the end of that historic meeting at the White House, the “War on Terrorism” was officially launched.

The war cabinet had decided to launch an an illegal and criminal war on Afghanistan, based on essentially two interrelated concepts:

1. The 9/11 attacks although allegedly conducted by Al Qaeda were upheld as an all out military attack by a foreign power.

2. Afghanistan in allegedly supporting Al Qaeda, was responsible for an act of military aggression directed against the United States of America.

The tragic events of 9/11 provided the required justification to wage war on Afghanistan on “humanitarian grounds”, with the full support of World public opinion and the endorsement of the “international community”. Several prominent “progressive” intellectuals made a case for “retaliation against terrorism”, on moral and ethical grounds. In taking on this stance they provided legitimacy to the conduct of war crimes. The “just cause” military doctrine (jus ad bellum) was accepted and upheld at face value as a legitimate response to 9/11.

In the wake of 9/11, the antiwar movement was completely isolated. The trade unions and civil society organizations had swallowed the media lies and government propaganda. They had accepted a war of retribution against Afghanistan, an impoverished country in Central Asia of 30 million people.

The myth of the “outside enemy” and the threat of “Islamic terrorists” was the cornerstone of the Bush administration’s military doctrine, used as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention the repeal of civil liberties and constitutional government in America. The post 9/11 era was also characterised by the development of Islamophobia, including routine ethnic profiling directed against Muslims.

Where was Osama bin Laden on September 11, 2001?

Is there any proof to the effect that Osama bin Laden, the bogeyman, coordinated the 9/11 attacks as claimed in the official 9/11 narrative?

According to CBS news (Dan Rather, January 28, 2002), “Enemy Number One” was admitted to the urology ward of a Pakistani military hospital in Rawalpindi on September 10, 2001, courtesy of America’s indefectible ally Pakistan. Rawalpindi is the Headquarters of the Pakistani military including its intelligence apparatus. He could have been arrested at short notice which would have “saved us a lot of trouble”, but then we would not have had an Osama Legend, which has fed the news chain as well as presidential speeches in the course of the last eleven years.

DAN RATHER. As the United states and its allies in the war on terrorism press the hunt for Osama bin Laden, CBS News has exclusive information tonight about where bin Laden was and what he was doing in the last hours before his followers struck the United States September 11.

This is the result of hard-nosed investigative reporting by a team of CBS news journalists, and by one of the best foreign correspondents in the business, CBS`s Barry Petersen. Here is his report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) BARRY PETERSEN, CBS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Everyone remembers what happened on September 11. Here`s the story of what may have happened the night before. It is a tale as twisted as the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

CBS News has been told that the night before the September 11 terrorist attack, Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan. He was getting medical treatment with the support of the very military that days later pledged its backing for the U.S. war on terror in Afghanistan. (transcript of CBS report, see

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CBS203A.html , see also


CBS News footage of the Rawalpindi, Pakistan, hospital where bin Laden was allegedly treated the day before 9/11. [Source: CBS News]

The foregoing CBS report which is of utmost relevance indicates two obvious facts:

1. Osama bin Laden could not reasonably have coordinated the 9/11 attacks from his hospital bed;

2. The hospital was under the jurisdiction of the Pakistani Armed Forces, which has close links to the Pentagon. Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts were known to both the Pakistani and US military.

U.S. military and intelligence advisers based in Rawalpindi. were working closely with their Pakistani counterparts. Again, no attempt was made to arrest America’s best known fugitive. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld claimed, at the time, that the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden were unknown. According to Rumsfeld: “Its like looking for a needle in a stack of hay”.

Recovering from his hospital treatment in Rawalpindi on the 11th of September, how could Osama have coordinated the 9/11 attacks?

How could Afghanistan be made responsible for these attacks by Al Qaeda? Bin Laden is a national of Saudi Arabia who, according to CBS News, was not in Afghanistan, but in Pakistan at the time of the attacks.

September 12, 2001: The Invasion of Afghanistan: NATO’s Doctrine of Collective Security

The immediate response of the US and its NATO allies to the 9/11 attacks was to the declare a war of retribution against Afghanistan on the grounds that the Taliban government was protecting “terror mastermind” Osama bin Laden, who at the time of the attacks was in Pakistan, protected by the Pakistani military and intelligence apparatus. In a bitter irony, the Pakistani government and military, which had facilitated bin Laden’s hospitalization in Rawalpindi on September 10, offered to assist the US in “going after bin Laden”. An agreement to this effect was reached on September 12 in Washington between the head of Pakistan’s military Intelligence (ISI) General Mahmoud Ahmed and Secretary Colin Powell.

Parroting official statements, the Western media mantra on September 12, 2001 had already approved the launching of “punitive actions” directed against civilian targets in Afghanistan. In the words of William Saffire writing in the New York Times: “When we reasonably determine our attackers’ bases and camps, we must pulverize them — minimizing but accepting the risk of collateral damage” — and act overtly or covertly to destabilize terror’s national hosts”.

By allegedly harboring bin Laden, the Afghan government was complicit, according to both the US administration and NATO, for having waged an act of war against the United States.

This decision was taken by the Bush-Cheney war cabinet in the evening of September 11, 2001. It was based on the presumption, “confirmed” by the head of the CIA that Al Qaeda was behind the attacks.

On the following morning, September 12, 2001, NATO’s Atlantic Council meeting in Brussels, endorsed the Bush administration’s declaration of war on Afghanistan (taken by the war cabinet at 11pm on September 11), invoking Article 5 of the Washington Treaty.

Meanwhile, on two occasions in the course of September 2001, the Afghan government –through diplomatic channels– offered to hand over Osama Bin laden to US Justice. These overtures were turned down by president Bush, on the grounds that America “does not negotiate with terrorists”.

The War on Afghanistan: First Stage of the “Global War on Terrorism”

The war on Afghanistan was launched 26 days later on the morning of October 7, 2001. The timing of this war begs the question: how long does it take to plan and implement a major theater war several thousand miles away.

Military analysts will confirm that a major theater war takes months and months, up to a year or more of advanced preparations. Confirmed by press reports, the war on Afghanistan was already in an advanced state of readiness prior to September 11, 2001, which begs the question of foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks.

In other words, the 9/11 attacks were used as a means to trigger a military agenda which was already on the drawing board of both the Pentagon and NATO.

The repeal of civil liberties in America was launched in parallel with the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan. Immediately following 9/11, the PATRIOT legislation was adopted. The Homeland Security apparatus was launched, with a view to “protecting Americans against terrorists”. This post-911 legal and institutional framework had been carefully crafted prior to the 9/11 attacks.

Article 5 of the Washington Treaty: NATO’s Legal Argument

In invoking Article 5 on the morning of September 12, 2001, NATO’s Atlantic Council endorsed a criminal military agenda, in derogation of international law.

The legal argument used by Washington and NATO to invade Afghanistan was that the September 11 attacks constituted an undeclared “armed attack” “from abroad” by an unnamed foreign power, and that consequently “the laws of war” apply, allowing the nation under attack, to strike back in the name of “self-defense”.

On the morning of September 12, 2001, NATO’s North Atlantic Council meeting in Brussels, responded to the decision of the War Cabinet taken a few hours earlier at 11pm on 9/11, adopted the following resolution:

“if it is determined that the [September 11, 2001] attack against the United States was directed from abroad [Afghanistan] against “The North Atlantic area“, it shall be regarded as an action covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty”. (emphasis added)

In this regard, Article 5 of the Washington Treaty stipulates that if:

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.” (NATO,

What is Article 5, NATO Topics – NATO and the Scourge of Terrorism, accessed 24 November 2009, emphasis added)

An act of war by a foreign nation (Afghanistan) against a member of the Atlantic Alliance (the USA) was considered as an act of war against all members under NATO’s doctrine of collective security.

Under no stretch of the imagination, can the attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon be categorized as an act of war by a foreign country. But nobody seemed to have raised this issue.

“Use of Armed Force” only “If It is Determined…”

There was an “if” in the September 12 resolution. Article 5 would apply only if it is determined that Afghanistan as a Nation State was complicit or behind the 9/11 attacks.

In practice, the “if” had already been waived prior to 9/11. The entire NATO arsenal was already on a war footing. In military terms, NATO and the US were already in an advanced state of readiness. Known to military analysts, but never revealed in the Western media, the implementation of a large scale theater war takes at least one year of advanced operational planning, prior to the launching of an invasion.

The use of article 5 of the Washington Treaty had in all likelihood been contemplated by military planners, as a pretext for waging war, prior to 9/11.

There was, however, no official declaration of war on September 12th. The Alliance waited until 3 days before the invasion to declare war on Afghanistan, an impoverished country which by no stretch of the imagination could have launched an attack against a member state of “The North Atlantic area”.

The September 12 resolution of the Atlantic Council required “determination” and corroborating evidence, that:

1) Al Qaeda led by Osama bin Laden with the support of a foreign power had ordered the “attack from abroad” on the United States of America;

2) The terrorist attacks of 9/11 constituted a bona fide military operation (under the provisions of Article 5) by an alleged foreign country (Afghanistan) against a NATO member state, and consequently against all NATO member states under the doctrine of collective security:

“Article 5 and the case of the terrorist attacks against the United States: The United States has been the object of brutal terrorist attacks. It immediately consulted with the other members of the Alliance. The Alliance determined that the US had been the object of an armed attack. The Alliance therefore agreed that if it was determined that this attack was directed from abroad, it would be regarded as covered by Article 5. NATO Secretary General, Lord Robertson, subsequently informed the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the Alliance’s decision.

Article 5 has thus been invoked, but no determination has yet been made whether the attack against the United States was directed from abroad.

If such a determination is made, each Ally will then consider what assistance it should provide. In practice, there will be consultations among the Allies. Any collective action by NATO will be decided by the North Atlantic Council. The United States can also carry out independent actions, consistent with its rights and obligations under the UN Charter.

Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to the situation. This assistance is not necessarily military and depends on the material resources of each country. Each individual member determines how it will contribute and will consult with the other members, bearing in mind that the ultimate aim is to “to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area”.

By invoking Article 5, NATO members have shown their solidarity toward the United States and condemned, in the strongest possible way, the terrorist attacks against the United States on 11 September.

If the conditions are met for the application of Article 5, NATO Allies will decide how to assist the United States.

(Many Allies have clearly offered emergency assistance). Each Ally is obliged to assist the United States by taking forward, individually and in concert with other Allies, such action as it deems necessary. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in these particular circumstances.

No collective action will be taken by NATO until further consultations are held and further decisions are made by the the North Atlantic Council.

(NATO, NATO Topics – NATO and the Scourge of Terrorism, accessed 24 November 2009, emphasis added)

The Mysterious Frank Taylor Report

The final decision to invoke Article 5 in relation to the 9/11 attacks came three weeks later upon the submission to the NATO Council of a mysterious classified report by a US State Department official named Frank Taylor. The report was submitted to NATO on October 2nd, 5 days before the commencement of the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan.

Frank Taylor was working in the US State Department. He had been entrusted with the writing of a brief to establish whether the US “had been attacked from abroad”, pursuant to the North Atlantic Council’s resolution of September 12 2001.

US Ambassador at Large and Co-ordinator for Counter-terrorism Frank Taylor briefed the North Atlantic Council on October 2nd, five days before the commencement of the bombings.

On October 2nd he handed his brief to NATO “on the results of investigations into the 11 September attacks… ” NATO – Topic: Terrorism, NATO and the fight against Terrorism, accessed 24 November 2009).

The classified report was not released to the media. And to this date, to our knowledge, it has remained classified.

NATO’s Secretary General Lord Robertson casually summarised the substance of the Frank Taylor report in a press release:

“This morning, the United States briefed the North Atlantic Council on the results of the investigation into who was responsible for the horrific terrorist attacks which took place on September 11.

The briefing was given by Ambassador Frank Taylor, the United States Department of State Coordinator for Counter-terrorism.

This morning’s briefing follows those offered by United States Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and United States Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, and illustrates the commitment of the United States to maintain close cooperation with Allies.

Today’s was classified briefing and so I cannot give you all the details.

Briefings are also being given directly by the United States to the Allies in their capitals.

The briefing addressed the events of September 11 themselves, the results of the investigation so far, what is known about Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaida organisation and their involvement in the attacks and in previous terrorist activity, and the links between al-Qaida and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

The facts are clear and compelling. The information presented points conclusively to an al-Qaida role in the September 11 attacks.

We know that the individuals who carried out these attacks were part of the world-wide terrorist network of al-Qaida, headed by Osama bin Laden and his key lieutenants and protected by the Taliban.

On the basis of this briefing, it has now been determined that the attack against the United States on September 11 was directed from abroad and shall therefore be regarded as an action covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which states that an armed attack on one or more of the Allies in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.

I want to reiterate that the United States of America can rely on the full support of its 18 NATO Allies in the campaign against terrorism.” (Lord Robertson, NATO Secretary General, statement to the NATO Council, State Department, Appendix H, Multinational Response to September 11 NATO Press http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/10313.pdf, accessed 24 November 2009, emphasis added)

In other words, 2 days before the actual commencement of the bombing campaign on October 7, the North Atlantic Council decided, based on the information provided by Frank Taylor to the Council “that the attacks were directed from abroad” by Al Qaeda, headed by Osama bin Laden, thereby requiring an action on the part of NATO under Article 5 of the Washington Treaty ( NATO – Topic: Terrorism, NATO and the fight against Terrorism, accessed 24 November 2009):

NATO action under article 5, was outlined in an October 4 decision, 3 days before the commencement of the bombings.

Two days later, on 4 October, NATO agreed on eight measures in support the United States, which were tantamount to an illegal declaration of war on Afghanistan: to enhance intelligence sharing and co-operation, both bilaterally and in appropriate NATO bodies, relating to the threats posed by terrorism and the actions to be taken against it; to provide, individually or collectively, as appropriate and according to their capabilities, [military] assistance to Allies and other states which are or may be subject to increased terrorist threats as a result of their support for the campaign against terrorism;

to take necessary measures to provide increased security for facilities of the United States and other Allies on their territory; to backfill selected Allied assets in NATO’s area of responsibility that are required to directly support operations against terrorism; to provide blanket overflight clearances for the United States and other Allies’ aircraft, in accordance with the necessary air traffic arrangements and national procedures, for military flights related to operations against terrorism; to provide access for the United States and other Allies to ports and airfields on the territory of NATO nations for operations against terrorism, including for refuelling, in accordance with national procedures; that the Alliance is ready to deploy elements of its Standing Naval Forces to the Eastern Mediterranean in order to provide a NATO presence and demonstrate resolve; and that the Alliance is similarly ready to deploy elements of its NATO Airborne Early Warning Force to support operations against terrorism.

NATO – Topic: Terrorism, NATO and the fight against Terrorism, accessed 24 November 2009

Press reports of Frank Taylor’s brief to the NATO Council were scanty. The invocation of Article 5, five days before the bombings commenced, was barely mentioned. The media consensus was: “all roads lead to Bin Laden” as if bin Laden was a Nation State which had attacked America.

What stands out are outright lies and fabrications. Moreover, prior to October 2nd, NATO had no pretext under Article 5 of the Washington Treaty to intervene militarily in Afghanistan.

The pretext was provided by Frank Taylor’s classified report, which was not made public.

The two UN Security Council resolutions adopted in the course of September 2001, did not, under any circumstances, provide a justification for the invasion and illegal occupation of a UN member country of 28 million people. (see Security Council resolution 1368 (2001) Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts, Security Council resolution 1373 (2001) Threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts).

UNSC Resolution 1373 (2001) called for prevention and suppression of terrorist acts, as well suppression of the financing of terrorism:

“(e) Ensure that any person who participates in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or in supporting terrorist acts is brought to justice and ensure that, in addition to any other measures against them, such terrorist acts are established as serious criminal offences in domestic laws and regulations and that the punishment duly reflects the seriousness of such terrorist acts;

3. Calls upon all States to:

“(a) Find ways of intensifying and accelerating the exchange of operational information, especially regarding actions or movements of terrorist persons or networks; forged or falsified travel documents; traffic in arms, explosives or sensitive materials; use of communications technologies by terrorist groups; and the threat posed by the possession of weapons of mass destruction by terrorist groups;

“(b) Exchange information in accordance with international and domestic law and cooperate on administrative and judicial matters to prevent the commission of terrorist acts;

“(c) Cooperate, particularly through bilateral and multilateral arrangements and agreements, to prevent and suppress terrorist attacks and take action against perpetrators of such acts;

“4. Notes with concern the close connection between international terrorism and transnational organized crime, illicit drugs, money-laundering, illegal arms-trafficking, and illegal movement of nuclear, chemical, biological and other potentially deadly materials, and in this regard emphasizes the need to enhance coordination of efforts on national, subregional, regional and international levels in order to strengthen a global response to this serious challenge and threat to international security;

“5. Declares that acts, methods, and practices of terrorism are contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations and that knowingly financing, planning and inciting terrorist acts are also contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations (excerpts of UNSC Resolution 1373 (2001, See also UN Press Release SC 7178


Security Council, 4385th Meeting, September 2001)

Nowhere in this resolution is there any mention of military action against a UN member State.

The US led war on Afghanistan, using 9/11 as a pretext and a justification is illegal and criminal.

The US and NATO heads of state and heads of government from 2001 to the present are complicit in the launching of a criminal and illegal war.

The Big Lie: Al Qaeda Made in America

Amply documented but rarely mentioned by the mainstream media, Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA going back to the Soviet- Afghan war. This was a known fact, corroborated by numerous sources including official documents of the US Congress, which the mainstream media chose to either dismiss or ignore. The intelligence community had time and again acknowledged that they had indeed supported Osama bin Laden, but that in the wake of the Cold War: “he turned against us”.

Both the 9/11 Commission Report as well as the Western media have largely upheld the “outside enemy” mythology, heralding Al Qaeda as the “mastermind” organization behind the 9/11 attacks. The official 9/11 narrative has not only distorted the causes underling the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, it has also erased the historical record of US covert support to international terrorism, while creating the illusion that America and “Western Civilization” are threatened.

Without an “outside enemy”, there could be no “Global War on Terrorism”. The entire national security agenda would collapse “like a deck of cards”. The war criminals in high office would have no leg to stand on.

After 9/11, the campaign of media disinformation served not only to drown the truth but also to kill much of the historical evidence on how this illusive Al Qaeda “outside enemy” had been fabricated and transformed into “Enemy Number One”.

This is why a legal procedure directed against the actual perpetrators of 9/11 is absolutely essential.

History of Al Qaeda

Important to the understanding of 9/11, US intelligence is the unspoken architect of “Islamic terrorism” going back to the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war.

Bin Laden was 22 years old and was trained in a CIA sponsored guerrilla training camp. Education in Afghanistan in the years preceding the Soviet-Afghan war was largely secular. With religious textbooks produced in Nebraska, the number of CIA sponsored religious schools (madrasahs) increased from 2,500 in 1980 to over 39,000.

“Advertisements, paid for from CIA funds, were placed in newspapers and newsletters around the world offering inducements and motivations to join the [Islamic] Jihad.” (Pervez Hoodbhoy, Peace Research, 1 May 2005)

”The United States spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings…The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system’s core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books,..”, (Washington Post, 23 March 2002)

Under the Reagan administration, US foreign policy evolved towards the unconditional support and endorsement of the Islamic “freedom fighters”. This endorsement has not in any way been modified.

In a twisted irony, throughout the post 911 era, US intelligence in liaison with Britain’s MI6, an Israel’s Mossad, continues to provide covert support to the radical Islamist organization allegedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Al Qaeda and its various affiliated groups including the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and factions within the Free Syria Army (FSA) are directly supported by the US and NATO.

In a bitter irony, the US and its allies claim to be waging a “war on terrorism” against the alleged architects of 9/11, while also using Al Qaeda operatives as their foot-soldiers.

Front row, from left: Major Gen. Hamid Gul, director general of Pakistan’s
Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI), Director of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)


Willian Webster; Deputy Director for Operations Clair George; an ISI colonel; and senior CIA official,

Milt Bearden at a Mujahideen training camp in North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan in 1987.

Ronald Reagan meets Afghan Mujahideen Commanders at the White House in 1985 (Reagan Archives)

Iraq: Alleged State Sponsor of the 9/11 Attacks

The formulation of a war of retribution conducted in the name of 9/11 was not limited to Afghanistan.

In the course of 2002, leading up to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, “Osama bin Laden” and “Weapons of Mass Destruction” statements circulated profusely in the news chain. While Washington’s official position was that Saddam Hussein was not behind the 9/11 attacks, insinuations abounded both in presidential speeches as well as in the Western media. According to Bush, in an October 2002 press conference:

The threat comes from Iraq. It arises directly from the Iraqi regime’s own actions — its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror.  

We also must never forget the most vivid events of recent history. On September the 11th, 2001, America felt its vulnerability — even to threats that gather on the other side of the earth. We resolved then, and we are resolved today, to confront every threat, from any source [Iraq], that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America. President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat, October 7, 2002)

Barely two weeks before the invasion of Iraq, September 11, 2001 was mentioned abundantly by president Bush. In the weeks leading up to the March invasion, 45 percent of Americans believed Saddam Hussein was “personally involved” in the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. (See . The impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq / The Christian Science Monitor – CSMonitor.com, March 14, 2003)

Meanwhile, a new terrorist mastermind had emerged: Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi.

In Colin Powell’s historic address to the United Nations Security Council, in February 2003, detailed “documentation” on a sinister relationship between Saddam Hussein and Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was presented, focussing on his ability to produce deadly chemical, biological and radiological weapons, with the full support and endorsement of the secular Baathist regime. The implication of Colin’s Powell’s assertions, which were totally fabricated, was that Saddam Hussein and an Al Qaeda affiliated organization had joined hands in the production of WMD in Northern Iraq and that the Hussein government was a “state sponsor” of terrorism.

The main thrust of the disinformation campaign continued in the wake of the March 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq. It consisted in presenting the Iraqi resistance movement as “terrorists”. The image of “terrorists opposed to democracy” fighting US “peacekeepers” appeared on television screens and news tabloids across the globe.

Iran: Condemned by a New York City Court for Supporting Al Qaeda in the 9/11 Attacks

In the wake of the Iraq invasion, the same alleged “state sponsorship” of terrorism accusations emerged in relation to Iran.

In December 2011, the Islamic Republic of Iran was condemned by a Manhattan court, for its alleged role in supporting Al Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks.

The investigation into Tehran’s alleged role was launched in 2004, pursuant to a recommendation of the 9/11 Commission “regarding an apparent link between Iran, Hezbollah, and the 9/11 hijackers”. The 9/11 Commission’s recommendation was that this “apparent link” required “further investigation by the U.S. government.” (9/11 Commission Report , p. 241). (See Iran 911 Case ).

In the December 2011 court judgment (Havlish v. Iran) “U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels ruled that Iran and Hezbollah materially and directly supported al Qaeda in the September 11, 2001 attacks and are legally responsible for damages to hundreds of family members of 9/11 victims who are plaintiffs in the case”.

According to the plaintiffs attorneys “Iran, Hezbollah, and al Qaeda formed a terror alliance in the early 1990s. Citing their national security and intelligence experts, the attorneys explained “how the pragmatic terror leaders overcame the Sunni-Shi’a divide in order to confront the U.S. (the “Great Satan”) and Israel (the “Lesser Satan”)”. Iran and Hezbollah allegedly provided “training to members of al Qaeda in, among other things, the use of explosives to destroy large buildings.” (See Iran 911 Case ).

This judicial procedure is nothing more than another vicious weapon in the fabricated “War on Terror” to be used against another Muslim country, with a view to destabilizing Iran as well as justifying ongoing military threats. It also says a lot more about the people behind the lawsuit than about the accused. The expert witnesses who testified against Iran are very active in warmongering neocon circles. They belong to a web of architects of the 21st century Middle-Eastern wars, ranging from high profile propagandists to intelligence and military officers, including former U.S. officials.

But what makes this case absurd is that in September 2011, a few months before the judgment, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has questioned the official 9/11 narrative, was accused by Al-Qaeda leaders of “spreading conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks”. The semi-official media outlet of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, insisted that al-Qaeda “had been behind the attacks and criticised the Iranian president for discrediting the terrorist group.” (See Julie Levesque, Iran Accused of being behind 9/11 Attacks. U.S. Court Judgment, December 2011 (Havlish v. Iran),

Global Research, May 11, 2012)

Al Qaeda: US-NATO Foot-soldiers

Ironically, while Washington accuses Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran of complicity in the 9/11 attacks, the historical record and evidence indelibly point to the “state sponsorship” of Al Qaeda by the CIA, MI6 and their intelligence counterparts in Pakistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Realities are turned upside down. Al Qaeda death squads have been recruited to wage America’s humanitarian wars throughout the Middle East an d North Africa.

In Syria Al Qaeda units were recruited by NATO and the Turkish High command: “Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels.” (http://www.debka.com/article/21255/ Debkafile, August 31, 2011).

In Libya, jihadists from Afghanistan trained by the CIA were dispatched to fight with the “pro-democracy” rebels under the helm of “former” Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Commander Abdel Hakim Belhadj:

Western policy makers admit that NATO’s operations in Libya have played the primary role in emboldening Al Qaeda’s AQIM faction (Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb). The Fortune 500-funded Brookings Institution’s Bruce Riedel in his article, “The New Al Qaeda Menace,” admits that AQIM is now heavily armed thanks to NATO’s intervention in Libya, and that AQIM’s base in Mali, North Africa, serves as a staging ground for terrorist activities across the region. http://www.globalresearch.ca/al-qaeda-and-natos-pan-arab-terrorist-blitzkrieg/

“Crimes against Civilization”

9/11 mythology has been the mainstay of war propaganda, which in itself constitutes a criminal act under international law.

Fiction prevails over reality. For propaganda to be effective, public opinion must firmly endorse the official 9/11 narrative to the effect that Al Qaeda was behind the attacks. A well organized structure of media disinformation is required to reach this objective. Perpetuating the 9/11 Legend also requires defying as well smearing the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Throughout the post 9/11 era, a panoply of Al Qaeda related events and circumstances is presented to public opinion on a daily basis. These include terrorist threats, warnings and attacks, police investigations, insurgencies and counter-insurgencies, country-level regime change, social conflict, sectarian violence, racism, religious divisions, Islamic thought, Western values, etc.

Muslims are presented as the perpetrators of the 9/11, thereby unleashing a Worldwide demonization campaign.

In turn, 9/11, Al Qaeda – War on Terrorism rhetoric permeates political discourse at all levels of government, including bipartisan debate on Capitol Hill, in committees of the House and the Senate, at the British House of Commons, and, lest we forget, at the United Nations Security Council. All these various bodies are complicit in a criminal project.

September 11 and Al Qaeda concepts, repeated ad nauseam have potentially traumatic impacts on the human mind and the ability of normal human beings to analyze and comprehend the “real outside World” of war, politics and the economic crisis.

What is at stake is human consciousness and comprehension based on concepts and facts.

With September 11 there are no verifiable “facts” and “concepts”, because 9/11 as well as Al Qaeda have evolved into a media mythology, a legend, an invented ideological construct, used as an unsubtle tool of war propaganda.

Al Qaeda constitutes a stylized, fake and almost folkloric abstraction of terrorism, which permeates the inner consciousness of millions of people around the World.

Reference to Al Qaeda has become a dogma, a belief, which most people espouse unconditionally. According to the media, “Muslims were behind the attacks”, thereby justifying a war of retribution against Muslim countries.

Racism and Islamophobia are an integral part of war propaganda.

Is this political indoctrination? Is it brain-washing? If so what is the underlying objective?

People’s capacity to independently analyse World events, as well as address causal relationships pertaining to politics and society, is significantly impaired. That is the objective!

The routine use of 9/11 and Al Qaeda to generate blanket explanations of complex political events is meant to create confusion.

It prevents people from thinking. It strikes at the core of human values. In a sense, it destroys civilization.

All of these complex Al Qaeda related occurrences are explained by politicians, the corporate media, Hollywood and the Washington think tanks under a single blanket “bad guys” heading, in which Al Qaeda is casually and repeatedly pinpointed as “the cause” of numerous terror events around the World.

The criminality underlying post 9/11 propaganda is of much broader nature, affecting people’s mindsets, redefining fundamental social, political and institutional relations.

“Crimes against Civilization” have been committed.

9/11 mythology precipitates the World into barbarity.

Copyright © 2012 Global Research



November 18th, 2012 by

Taking America Back: Forclosing Uncle Sam!

By David A. McElroy

Nov. 15, 2012


Are you, like me, mortified by the 2012 re-election of Barack Obama? Just mourning for America and lost liberty in vanishing prosperity is not enough. Congressman Ron Paul’s farewell speech to Congress lamented a “continuous march to corporatism and fascism.” We must take America back, before we are locked in camps or mass graves. What to do?

Many, like me, have signed one or more of the petitions to the White House asking that Obama respond to citizens’ requests that he allow their state to peaceably secede from the federal Union. These petitions represent citizens, but not state governments, from all 50 states mulling secession. Obama’s office policy requires his administration to respond to any petitions garnering 25,000 or more signatures within 30 days, and several secession request petitions, initiated Nov. 7th, qualified just a few days after his re-election. Do you see a tempest is brewing? What if all 50 states told the corporation known as the USA to jump in the Potomac wearing a cement overcoat? Obama must be thinking, what to do?

We keep hearing alarm bells about America falling off a “fiscal cliff” into a horrible economic crash of apocalyptic ruin. We know many of our businesses are failing or gone forever, including some banks. Banks are ravenously desperate, with the Wall Street boys swallowing billions of tax dollar bailouts without assisting us on Main Street at all. They are using foreclosure with reckless abandon to pad their ledgers. So recklessly, that even those who owed nothing to a bank were foreclosed upon fraudulently, and with a judge’s authority! We keep hearing how Uncle Sam is some $16 TRILLION DOLLARS in debt, deep into bankruptcy! Pensions, Social Security, Medicare, and more jobs are in danger, we’re told, even as the Obama administration continues sending billions of dollars and thousands of jobs out of the country. He continues to prosecute costly wars of aggression abroad while persecuting Americans at home. Taxes will be staggering. What to do?

As the current trendy fiscal remedy is foreclosure, I suggest that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. So get a gander! Let us foreclose upon federal assets, which there are in abundance. What Uncle Sam has is really ours anyway, and all of it was taken from Americans by force or fraud. Larceny is the nature of government. You might check Walter Burien’s work at www.CAFR1.com to see how government really is reaping great profits and hiding huge assets from the public with double booking techniques. And, no, I don’t think we should seize federal assets only to auction them off to the highest bidders, as this would play right into the hands of those “too big to fail” criminals who are driving us to economic ruin. We must return assets to the middle and lower classes who were so ruthlessly and deceitfully robbed, treated as mere slaves on Uncle Sam’s plantation.
One way to do this is wholesale, with secession. This can be either orderly and peaceful, as in Iceland’s recent case, or chaotic and riotous, as was the Soviet Union’s breakup.
When a state secedes, it takes back all the federal real estate, installations, facilities, military equipment, weapons systems, tools, etc., just as the states of the Soviet Union did in that empire’s collapse. States like the Ukraine and Kazakhstan even retained nuclear weapons and rocket launching facilities. Much of this largess can be distributed to the people to meet immediate needs, like food supplies, as that state or its’ militias might determine. Russian soldiers had looted many military items for the black market, more or less openly. They had not been paid for some time. Eliminating onerous federal taxes and regulations will bring relief to all the people with real opportunities for prosperous living. In this age of Emperor Obama, where the idea of Redistributing Wealth is trendy, let’s apply this remedy to the world’s biggest robber baron, Uncle Sam. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Aren’t you tired of being goosed? Get a gander.
Look at Iceland’s example. That nation was teetering on insolvency due to the same usury and fraudulent central banking schemes we suffer here. Those people repudiated the debts imposed upon them, and jailed the bankers and the politicians assisting them in robbing Iceland. Working class people wrote a new constitution for Iceland. Now Iceland has a vibrant and prosperous economy. Icelanders tossed their evil government and the banks that owned it out of business forever. It was a good move we should employ here in America… FORECLOSE GOVERNMENT!
The other way would be to pursue foreclosing upon specified federal assets through the obviously corrupt court system which is part and parcel of the government raping us. The same court system allowing banks to foreclose upon homes fraudulently because of the mortgage paper shuffling. I see no hope in that venue, as the courts long ago abandoned our Constitution. The evil National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 proved that in gutting our Bill of Rights. Supreme Court justices brazenly advocate for international (socialist) law trumping the Constitution of the United States. What to do?
Read Ron Paul’s Farewell Address. It is his magnum opus for Truth, Justice, & Liberty. Check it out at www.campaignforliberty.org/national-blog/transcript-of-farewell-address
Dr. Paul is “… recognizing that it’s the virtue and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish.” Is it any wonder that socialists always seek to destroy family values, virtues and morality? Paul, speaking as a 2012 candidate for President, was booed when he spoke of applying the Golden Rule to US foreign policy. In his farewell, he noted, “A society that boos or ridicules the Golden Rule is not a moral society. All great religions endorse the Golden rule. The same moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all government officials. They cannot be exempt.”
Congressman Paul, author of Liberty Defined, says secession is an American principle, a right identified in the Declaration of Independence. He concluded his farewell address by stating, “The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of liberty.” We must secede to succeed!


Due to the intellectual diversity now prevalent in American society, I do not see any possibility of this country consolidating a worldview of any nature. We have little in common in even the smallest groups, but the fire of freedom still burns hot in the breast of hundreds of thousands scattered across the States. A fire that may soon ignite a passion in those less capable of understanding that this diversity is a part of a well thought out plan to enslave the whole world, while the people were side tracked in a standard of living never before achieved in history. David McElroy, I, and thousands of others across America have committed their lives and assets to fanning the flames of “a passion for freedom from tyrannical governance” by either our personal writing ability or increasing the distribution of others more capable. The latter is something anyone can do with a little effort, by coping erudite email, or web content, and sending it out to their friends and family. NOTE: Always give credit to the authors you copy. You will know you have grown in comprehending America’s demise when you finally understand that the pledge of allegiance was a masterful piece of propaganda. You do not understand anything about this Nation if you still think we should blindly follow our representatives, or what others think. America was intended to be a better world by promoting the individuals hatred of tyranny, and hunger for knowledge. The respect for individualism was highly prized among our ancestors, as nothing was more rewarding than being self-sufficient. Now, it seems the majority have sucked the teat of socialism so long they are intellectually deformed, and will fight to the death before giving up their free lunch. That’s good because it gives us all the justification we need to do what ever is needed to win this battle for our freedom. It takes courage to say no-thanks to a free lunch, because it destroys my initiative. And it takes a hard-earned intellectual development experience to understand that a government with a hand out is the enemy of humanity. It is despicable far beyond decent language to explain. Stand up America, or get knocked down, your choice!
If you think the first civil war was horrendous, wait till you see what modern weapons produce. There will be wailing and gashing of teeth in the streets of America that drowns out the sounds of the weapons. Why would you die when all we want is for you to stand on your own two feet?




November 17th, 2012 by






Declaration of Independence 2.0: Restoring the Republic


Radio host Alex Jones today called for a secondAmerican Revolution led by states who would secede from the federal government and reconstitute the Republic under the terms of theDeclaration of Independence, bill of rights and constitution. (Read the transcript here).

The call for Americans to rally behind a restoration of the Republic and the bill of rights comes on the back of a burgeoning secessionist movement that has swept the country with residents from all 50 states submitting petitions to the White House calling for states to withdraw from the union and form their own independent governments. The petitions have received a combined number of signatures totaling over a million.


During his nationwide broadcast today, Jones laid out the battle plan for secession, emphasizing that states must first secede from the federal government, which has gone rogue, and then use the terms of the Declaration of Independence to restore the Republic, not create a new country.

Jones stressed that he was calling for a cultural restoration in the spirit of the bill of rights – a newly unified America under the Constitution – and not a violent overthrow, noting that it was the states that created the Constitution and the federal government in the first place.

Jones noted that the only course to restoring liberty was clear – “To follow the founding document of the Republic, the Declaration of Independence, wherein it is clearly stated that it is the right and the duty of the American people, when their government becomes destructive and tyrannical, to abolish and reconstitute it in a form that protects our liberties.”

“We are not calling for secession to form new separate countries, we are calling for secession because the states created the Constitution, bill of rights and federal government, and the federal government itself has been hijacked by foreign special interests – mainly banking cartels,” said Jones.

“I am calling for people to be educated about how we can secede to restore the Republic,” said Jones, warning that the media was attempting to characterize the entire movement as a plot to bring down America when in fact America has already been captured and taken over by the political and financial elite.

“This is the states putting their foot down and saying we are going to reconstitute the federal government under the bill of rights and constitution, we’re going to kick out the bureaucrats, the lobbyists, the foreign criminals, and the Federal Reserve who have taken over,” explained Jones.

The radio host also put the call out for Congressman Ron Paul to head up such a movement and utilize his vast network of grass roots liberty-loving activists to lead the charge, as well as using his contacts in each state to begin the process of secession in the legislature.

Harvard constitutional law scholar and adviser to Ron Paul, Edwin Viera, appeared on the syndicated radio broadcast and agreed with Alex Jones’ constitutional battle plan, with the declaration of independence as the centerpiece of legal authority.

Ron Paul’s former congressional chief of staff and founder of the Von Mises institute, Lew Rockwell, also appeared on the special broadcast and concurred with Jones’ strategy that now is the time to launch our offensive and restore the republic.

The right of the people to reconstitute their government if it becomes oppressive and onerous is clearly outlined in the Declaration of Independence.

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Preamble, Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

In the aftermath of petitions from all 50 states to secede being posted on the White House website and signed by over a million Americans, the secessionist movement has been portrayed as anti-American, unpatriotic and even treasonous. In reality, as Ron Paul has emphasized, it is as American as apple pie and George Washington.

The most popular petition out of all 50 that have been posted on the White House website applies to Texas and reads as follows;

“The US continues to suffer economic difficulties stemming from the federal government’s neglect to reform domestic and foreign spending. The citizens of the US suffer from blatant abuses of their rights such as the NDAA, the TSA, etc. Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it’s citizens’ standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government.”

The call for states to secede from the union, one now backed by over a million Americans, is part of a wider disenfranchisement with how the country has been infested and hijacked by a crony political elite and the principles of the founders decimated.

As over a million Americans express their disenfranchisement with the federal government by supporting a secessionist movement that has spread like wildfire, it is time to call for a new declaration of independence and a new commitment to restore the Republic in the face of an enemy that has subverted America from within.

The United States government has been seized by domestic and foreign banking cartels. This fact is so transparently obvious that talking heads on CNBC now laugh about it.

While Americans are being told to brace for tax hikes, spending cuts and a myriad of other austerity measures, the Federal Reserve has been sending trillions of dollars to foreign banks.

The federal government is supposed to represent the states, but it doesn’t, it represents the interests of the political and banking elite who themselves have no allegiance whatsoever to America.

Infowars is calling on patriots to start a movement to draft Ron Paul as the head of a brand new effort to restore the Republic, restore the bill of rights and opt out of the counterfeit America the banking elite has subverted and fashioned to serve their own interests.

The establishment media is already demonizing the secessionist movement as a rag-tag group of fringe kooks and paranoid racists, when in reality as the Daily Caller uncovered, it is comprised of former Marines, parents, business owners and ordinary mechanics.

Meanwhile, Obama supporters and other statists have called on the government to punish those putting their signatures to the secession petitions by having them stripped of their citizenship, deported and exiled.

It’s time to re-assert the narrative on secession and put it in its proper context, which is not an infantile reaction to the fact that Barack Obama won the election, but an expression of extreme uneasiness at the direction in which the country is heading, a widespread discontent that has been ongoing for long before Obama even took office, and a new commitment calling on states to nullify unconstitutional laws andregulations and secede from the increasingly tyrannical federal government.

Watch Ron Paul’s farewell speech below in which he skewers authoritarianism in all its forms and captures the true spirit of liberty which should drive the movement to secede from the federal government and reconstitute America under the Declaration of Independence.


White House secede petitions reach 675,000 signatures, 50 state participation

November 15th, 2012 by




David Martosko

Less than a week after a New Orleans suburbanite petitioned the White House to allow Louisiana to secede from the United States, petitions from seven states have collected enough signatures to trigger a promised review from the Obama administration.

By 6:00 a.m. EST Wednesday, more than 675,000 digital signatures appeared on 69 separate secession petitions covering all 50 states, according to a Daily Caller analysis of requests lodged with the White House’s “We the People” online petition system.

A petition from Vermont, where talk of secession is a regular feature of political life, was the final entry.

Petitions from AlabamaFloridaGeorgiaLouisianaNorth CarolinaTennessee and Texas residents have accrued at least 25,000 signatures, the number the Obama administration says it will reward with a staff review of online proposals. (RELATED: Will Texas secede? Petition triggers White House review)

The Texas petition leads all others by a wide margin. Shortly before 9:00 a.m. EST Wednesday, it had attracted 94,700 signatures. But a spokesperson for Gov. Rick Perry said Tuesday afternoon that he does not support the idea of his state striking out on its own.

“Gov. Perry believes in the greatness of our Union and nothing should be done to change it. But he also shares the frustrations many Americans have with our federal government,” according to a statement from the governor’s office.

A backlash Monday night saw requests filed with the White House to strip citizenship rights from Americans who signed petitions to help states secede. (RELATED: Anti-secession forces fight back with White House deportation petitions)

And in a similar nose-thumbing aimed at Texas’ conservative majority, progressives from the liberal state capital of Austin responded Monday with a petition to secede from their state if Texas as a whole should decide to leave the Union.

Late Tuesday a second group of Texans, this one from Houston, lodged their own White House petition. Secession-minded Texans, they wrote, “are mentally deficient and [we] do not want them representing us. We would like more education in our state to eradicate their disease.”

Houstonian “Kimberly F” — The White House does not provide last names — submitted the petition. She told The DC in an email that ”we need both sides presented, or we all look like a bunch of fools.”

A group from El Paso, too, wants no part of an independent Texas. “Allow the city of El Paso to secede from the state of Texas,” their petition reads. “El Paso is tired of being a second class city within Texas.”

But smaller petitions like theirs are a political side show of a political side show. One effort, aimed at Missourians, called for a nationwide catered pizza party to celebrate when the Show Me State left the U.S. (RELATED: Pizza party! White House petition silliness gets cheesy)


For all of you naysayers out there, America was never intended to be a nation, it was supposed to be a confederation of independent States that retained their own sovereignty, and the federal government was to have limited responsibilities. However, over time the dull and ignorant drank the kool-aid of unity and now we have a tyrant deciding which direction to wipe our backside. That’s not advice, it’s an order, and I for one do not need that kind of bulling in my life. If American’s had enough common sense to read history and figure out why we should be sovereign States, we would not be in this mess. We are not fooled by this exercise, and expected severe blowback when we signed up, so let it come we don’t give a shit.



Florida man describes being shot by police Taser as he sprayed fire with garden hose


PINELLAS PARK — The fire was all around Dan Jensen.

He could see it. He could smell it. He could hear it.

It was close enough to touch. It was burning down his neighbor's house. It was creeping toward Jensen's own fence 10 feet away, and he started spraying the fire with his hose.

Police ordered Jensen to get back, and he complied.

But after a few minutes passed without firefighters arriving, a frustrated Jensen stepped forward and leaned down to grab the skinny gray garden hose once again.

That's when he heard the order.

"Hit 'em! Take him down! Tase him!"

Within moments, Jensen was on the ground. He felt electric.

"It was all over me," Jensen said. "Crawling all over me."

The 42-year-old commercial fisherman is still struggling to comprehend exactly how things deteriorated so quickly Thursday. He said he doesn't understand why police shot him with a Taser that night as he tried to battle a house fire at 3420 Beechwood Ter. N.

Jensen's family, friends and neighbors have been quick to defend him and accuse police of crossing a line.

"It was wrong," he said. "There's no way around it. … I was fighting a fire. I wasn't fighting police. I thought they were here to help me. Instead, they hurt me."

Police said they can sympathize with the stress Jensen was under. But they said he put himself and officers in danger when he refused to back down from fighting the fire.

Pinellas Park Capt. Sanfield Forseth told the Tampa Bay Times authorities could have even charged Jensen with obstruction, but decided against it.

Jensen's attorney, Heidi Imhof, said she believes authorities are trying to deflect attention from their actions that night. She called the Taser use "excessive force."

"They can't just Taser anyone," she said. "He's an unarmed person on his private property trying to fight a fire."

Imhof said the officers had other options. They could have yanked Jensen away, she said, or just turned off the water.

The agency's policy says officers must issue a warning before using a Taser, "except when such warning could provide a tactical advantage to the subject."

Imhof said her client was never warned.

Jensen said he's "disappointed" in police.

He said that when they arrived on the scene, they told him to back off and let insurance take care of it. He did for a few minutes but grew impatient and irate. He picked up the hose again because he thought firefighters weren't getting there soon enough.

Officials told the Times it took six minutes for fire fighters to respond.

"That's my home," Jensen said Monday, his voice breaking. "That's my family."

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/13/3094917_


CONTINUE LEARNING AT http://anationbeguiled.wordpress.com



November 13th, 2012 by





By James P. Harvey


Many years ago, my wife and I decided to start attending church, but which one became the issue. We decide to just visit various Churches on a weekly basis, and never gave a thought to why there were so many flavors to choose from. Needless to say, it was not long before we noticed that they were more of a social club than a place of worship.

We already had the commitment to be Christians, but it became apparent there were many kinds of Christians, and that did not make sense to us.

How can there be more than one kind of Christian, made as much sense as, how can there be more than one kind of American?

Next, I decided to study the Bible in an effort to discover what a Christian really is, and that led me to spending fifteen years accumulating a massive theological library, WITH THE RESULT BEING, there is only one way to be a saved Christian, and that is to understand and follow the doctrines in Scripture, and submit to them in all things, not relying on your own understanding, but on the Grace of the Lord God Almighty.

This idea of being called a Christian, and being a Christian are not the same thing. Just as being called an American, and being one is not the same thing, because in both cases, there are doctrines one must understand and accept as the final word. For a Christian they are in the Bible, and for Americans they are in the Constitution, the bill of rights, Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers. No other sources are legitimate.

In today’s world, that is a totally rejected requirement by the majority of Christians, and Americans, and this apostasy is not just in America, but worldwide. Humanity has been infected with false doctrine and now believe they alone can decide what is right and wrong, and not just for their self, but for everyone everywhere.

For many centuries, silver-tongued preachers have distorted what being a Christian is, and likewise, for centuries, silver-tongued Politian’s with the assistance of the news media and educators have done likewise to Americans.

The result is, there are fewer and fewer real Christians and real Americans, and an over abundance of apostates who believe the human mind can decide what is true and what is false. Some even reject the existence of truth.

I’m only writing this because there may be people reading it that are confused as to why America is fast becoming a totalitarian police state, and they are being confronted by a government they no longer support, but are not sure why. Many are only concerned with their financial condition, and fail to understand why they cannot make ends meet, or afford a decent home. Many more have no clue that their freedom is under attack because their lifestyle is the constant pursuit of entertainment, and other kinds of personal pleasure. Others are so caught up in the two party political system they are blind to it being part of the problem and not the solution. Still, others are died in the wool enemies of freedom from excessive government control.

To them I say, you have no right to be in this country, and should be deported, just as I would say to an activist Muslim you have no right to attend this Church as a member. It makes no sense to let your enemies infiltrate your domain.

Now, as far as giving the reader a treatise on what America is supposed to be, I will refer you to a much higher intellect than mine, and her name is Publius Huldah, Her article is published today on http://anationbeguiled.com and I highly recommend you give it considerable thought if you want to be a free American, and not a beggar of the government.  OR, if you are reading this at some later date, go to her site at http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/

I highly recommend that you go through her archives and read everything she has written. 



By Publius Huldah


We are Americans. We are resourceful. When doors are slammed in our faces, we find another way.  Since five (5) lawless judges on the U.S. supreme Court betrayed us by failing to declare the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“obamacare”) unconstitutional; since we may be stuck with Obama for four more years; 1  and since a Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate will not repeal Obamacare, we must find another way.

There is another way. Here it is, and it comes from Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence.

Nullification Resolutions for State Legislatures

1. Resolved, That the States composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to the federal government; but that, with the Constitution for the United States, they established a federal government for limited purposes only.  That they delegated to this federal government only limited and enumerated powers; and reserved, each State to itself, all remaining powers, along with the right to their own self-government.

That whenever the federal government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.

That to these Principles, each State agreed as a State, and as the Parties to the Constitution.

That the federal government is not a party to the Constitution, but is merely the creature of the Constitution; and as the mere creature, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it; since that would have made the creature’s will, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers.  That as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each State has an equal right to judge for itself as to whether the creature has committed infractions, and as to the mode and measure of redress.

2. Resolved, That Art. I, Sec. 2, of the Constitution of The State of Tennessee acknowledges the Principle that the doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

3. Resolved, That in the Constitution of the United States, THE PEOPLE ordained and established a Federation of Sovereign States which united only for THE LIMITED PURPOSES enumerated in the Constitution: national defense, international commerce and relations; and domestically the creation of an uniform commercial system:  Weights & measures, patents & copyrights, a monetary system based on gold & silver, bankruptcy laws, mail delivery and road building. That the 10th  Amendment to the Constitution also declares that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

That nowhere in the Constitution of the United States was any power granted to Congress to make laws respecting the medical care of THE PEOPLE; and that nowhere in the Constitution are powers over this matter prohibited to the States.

4. Resolved, That Art. I, Sec. 1 of the Constitution of the United States provides that all legislative Powers granted by that Constitution are vested in CONGRESS; therefore, Departments within the Executive Branch are forbidden to make any “rules” or “laws” of general application whatsoever.

That administrative rules being promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services, one of the executive Departments of the federal government, to be set forth in Title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and which pretend to regulate the medical care of THE PEOPLE throughout the several States; are altogether void, and of no force, as in violation of Art. I, Sec.1, of the federal Constitution.

That as matters pertaining to the “medical care”, “health”, and “human services” of THE PEOPLE are nowhere delegated to the federal government by the federal Constitution; but are among the countless multitudes of matters reserved to the States or THE PEOPLE; the federal Department of Health and Human Services is itself an unlawful Department, and its mere existence an affront to the Constitution; and all of the powers it exercises are usurped powers as outside the scope of the powers delegated to the federal government by our Constitution.

That if the pretended “rules” of this spurious federal Department should stand, these conclusions would flow from them; that unelected bureaucrats within the Executive Branch of the federal government may force upon The States, THE PEOPLE, the medical profession, and The Churches their own ideas of what others must and must not do in the area of medical care; and may force upon them their own ideas of what medical treatments each person shall be provided or denied.

That this spurious federal Department will further send out swarms of officers to trespass upon hospitals, doctors’ offices, other places of provision of medical care, and premises of religious institutions, to harass providers of medical services, dictate to them as to what specific medical treatments they must provide and are forbidden to provide to their patients.

To this abomination is added the additional affront that the objects of these pretended “rules” are altogether outside the scope of the enumerated powers THE PEOPLE delegated to the federal government in our Constitution.

That the Departments within the Executive Branch of the federal government have established a pattern of unlawfully functioning as legislators, when they write “agency rules”; as executives, when they investigate and prosecute violations of “agency rules”; and as judges and juries when they decide whether violations of their “agency rules” have occurred and impose punishment.  Thus the Executive Branch unlawfully functions as legislator, accuser, judge & jury, in violation of the Constitution and of the Principles of Separation of Power and of Checks and Balances.

5. Resolved, That all aspects of the medical care of THE PEOPLE, not being anywhere delegated to the United States by the Constitution, or prohibited by The Constitution to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to THE PEOPLE.  Therefore, power over this matter is reserved solely and exclusively to the respective States and THE PEOPLE, each within its or their own territory.

6. Resolved, That to take from the States all the powers of self-government and to transfer all powers to a general and consolidated national government, in defiance of the Constitution which was ordained and established by THE PEOPLE, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of THE PEOPLE.

Therefore This State is determined to refuse to submit to undelegated powers exercised over them by the federal government; and rejects altogether the notion that the federal government may exercise unlimited powers over them.

That in cases of an abuse of the delegated (enumerated) powers, the members of the federal government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy.

But, where powers are usurped which have not been delegated to the federal government –when the federal government acts outside of, and in defiance of, the federal Constitution by exercising powers not delegated to it by that Constitution; then a nullification of the unlawful act is the rightful remedy.

Thus every State has a natural right – which pre-dates & pre-exists the federal Constitution – to nullify of their own authority all such lawless assumptions of power within the boundaries of their State.  That without this pre-existing natural and original right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whoever in the federal government chooses to exercise tyrannical powers over them.

The States alone are The Parties to the compact; and thus are solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it.  Congress, the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch are not parties to the contract; but are merely the creatures of the compact (Federalist No. 33, 5th para).  As mere creatures, they may exercise no powers other than those enumerated powers specifically delegated to them.

7. Resolved, That the misconstructions long and unlawfully applied by the federal government to the so-called “taxing”, “general welfare”, “interstate commerce”, and “necessary and proper” clauses, to the effect that these clauses bestow unlimited powers on the federal government, goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their powers by the federal Constitution. That the true and genuine meaning of those clauses is as follows:

 a) The “taxing” and “general welfare” clauses:  Art. I, Sec. 8, cl.1, employs “general terms” which are “immediately” followed by the “enumeration of particular powers” which “explain and qualify”, by a “recital of particulars”, the general terms. It is “error” to focus on the “general expressions” and disregard “the specifications which ascertain and limit their import”; thus, to argue that the general expression provides “an unlimited power” is “an absurdity” (Federalist Paper No. 41, last 4 paras).

 The federal Constitution declares that “the power of Congress…shall extend to certain enumerated cases.  This specification of particulars…excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd, as well as useless, if a general authority was intended…” (Federalist No. 83, 7th para).

 b) The “interstate commerce” clause: “Commerce” is the buying and selling of goods – only that and nothing more. Webster’s American Dictionary (1828) says “commerce” is:

“an interchange or mutual change of goods, wares, productions, or property of any kind, between nations or individuals… by barter, or by purchase and sale; trade; traffick… inland commerce…is the trade in the exchange of commodities between citizens of the same nation or state.”

Federalist No. 22 (4th para), Federalist No. 42 (9th  &10th  paras), Federalist No. 44 (at 2.), andFederalist No. 56  (5th & 6th paras), explain the two purposes of the “interstate commerce” clause: (1) to prohibit the States from imposing tolls and tariffs on articles of import and export – goods & commodities – merchandize – as they are transported through the States for purposes of buying and selling; and (2) to permit the federal government to impose duties on imports and exports, both inland and abroad.

Article I, Sec. 8, cl.1; Art. I, Sec. 9, cls. 5 & 6; and Art. I, Sec.10, cls. 2 & 3, of the federal Constitution give express effect to these two purposes of the “interstate commerce” clause.

c) The “necessary and proper” clause:  This clause merely delegates to Congress the power to pass laws necessary and proper to execute its declared powers (Federalist No. 29, 4th para); a power to do something must be a power to pass all laws necessary and proper for the execution of that power (Federalist No. 33, 3rd para); “the constitutional operation of the intended government would be precisely the same if [this clause] were entirely obliterated as if [it] were repeated in every article” (No. 33, 2nd para); and thus the clause is “perfectly harmless”, a  tautology or redundancy”(No. 33, 3rd para).  Madison writes to the same effect in (Federalist No. 44, at 1.).

The clause merely permits the execution of powers already delegated and enumerated in the federal Constitution.  No additional substantive powers are granted by this clause.

8.  Resolved, That contrary to the misconstructions long and unlawfully applied by the federal government, the federal Constitution is one of enumerated powers only:

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.  The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.  The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people.” (Federalist No. 45 , 9th para)

“…the proposed government cannot be deemed a national one; since its jurisdiction extends to certain enumerated objects only, and leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignity over all other objects…” (Federalist No. 39, 3rd para from end)

“…the general [federal] government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects...” (Federalist No. 14, 8th para)

“…It merits particular attention … that the laws of the Confederacy [those made by Congress], as to the ENUMERATED and LEGITIMATE objects of its jurisdiction, will become the SUPREME LAW of the land…Thus the legislatures, courts, and magistrates, of the respective members [the States], will be incorporated into the operations of the national government AS FAR AS ITS JUST AND CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY EXTENDS…” [caps are Hamilton’s] (Federalist No. 27, last para).

That The Federalist Papers – and not the U.S. supreme Court – is the highest authority and evidence “of the general opinion of those who framed, and of those who accepted the Constitution of the US. on questions as to it’s genuine meaning”. 2 The supreme Court is merely a creature of the Constitution and is completely subject to its terms; and when judges on that and lower federal courts – who serve during “good Behaviour” only (Art. III, Sec. 1, cl. 1) – usurp powers, as they did with their lawless opinion upholding obamacare, they must be impeached and removed from office (Federalist No. 81, 8th para).

9. Resolved, That those within the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches of the federal government are sweeping away all the barriers of our Constitution; and that no ramparts now remainbetween their unbridled and insatiable lust for power over THE PEOPLE except for the several States.

That if the States do not now resist all such blatantly unlawful usurpations of power, THE PEOPLE of their States will be delivered into abject slavery subject to the unbridled control of whosoever occupies the office of President.  Our Representatives in Congress have shirked their constitutional obligation to support the Constitution (Art. VI, cl. 3), by acquiescing in the blatant usurpations by the Executive Branch; and  have failed in their duty to impeach and remove those within the Executive Branch who usurp powers (Federalist No. 66, 2nd para, and No. 77, last para).  That the supreme Court long ago took the side of those who seek to exercise unlimited control over the States and THE PEOPLE; and that Congress has failed in its duty to impeach and remove federal judges who usurp powers (Federalist No. 81, 8th para).

That pursuant to Art. VI, cl. 3 of our federal Constitution, all State legislators, State Officers and State Judges take a solemn Oath to support our federal Constitution. Therefore, they are bound by sacred Oath to protect THE PEOPLE of their States from the usurpations of the federal government whose clear object is the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over the States and THE PEOPLE.

That our Framers anticipated the dangers we now face and provided wise counsel for such a time as this.  Federalist No. 28 (last 5 paras) states that when “the representatives of the people betray their constituents”, the people have no recourse but to exert “that original right of self-defense” [The Declaration of Independence, 2nd para], against “the usurpations of the national rulers” (5th para from end).

That in a Federation of States united under a federal government for only limited purposes,

“…the people… are…the masters of their own fate. Power being almost always the rival of power, the general [federal] government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general governmentThe people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress…” (4th para from end)

Thus, THE STATE LEGISLATURES are the ultimate bulwark of The People and The Ultimate Human Protectors of our Constitutional Republic:

“It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under pretenses so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men, as of the people at large. The legislatures will have better means of information. They can discover the danger at a distance; and possessing all the organs of civil power, and the confidence of the people, they can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different States, and unite their common forces for the protection of their common liberty.” (3rd para from end)

The last paragraph of Federalist No. 28 recognizes that when the federal government seeks

“… a despotism over the great body of the people … [the people] are in a situation, through the medium of their State governments, to take measures for their own defense…”

10. Resolved, That because men are corrupt and may not be trusted with power, the federal Constitution fixed the limits to which, and no further, the federal government may go.  Would we be wise if we permit the federal government to destroy the limits the Constitution places upon its powers? Would we be wise if we permit unelected bureaucrats in the Executive Departments of the federal government to regulate every aspect of our lives?

That if those who administer the federal government be permitted to transgress the limits fixed by the federal Constitution, by disregarding the limits on its powers set forth therein, then annihilation of the State Governments, and the erection upon their ruins, of a general consolidated  government, will be the inevitable consequence.

That the several States, being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of infractions to the federal Constitution; and that nullification by those Sovereign States of all unauthorized acts of the federal government is the rightful remedy.

THEREFORE, This State, recurring to its natural rights in matters outside the scope of the powers delegated to the federal government, declares Obamacare void, and of no force, and will take measures of its own for providing that neither that act, nor any others of the federal government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shalt be exercised in any manner whatsoever within This State.


1. The above is patterned on Thomas Jefferson’s various writings on nullification, including The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, written by him in response to the alien and sedition acts passed by Congress which purported to grant to the President tyrannical powers with respect to aliens & “seditious” words.

2. These Resolutions focus on an Act of Congress and administrative rules being made by a Department within the Executive Branch of the federal government. This Model may be easily adapted to address Executive Orders which are outside the scope of the President’s enumerated powers; and supreme Court opinions which exceed their enumerated powersand disregard the federal Constitution, such as their lawless rulings upholding Obamacare, banning public expressions of the Faith of Our Fathers  in order to convert us into a secular humanist State, and misapplying Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment in order to undermine the morals of the People and destroy the residuary sovereignity of The States.

3. Several attorneys, historians, and others who claim special knowledge on this subject have asserted that States have no right to nullify anything the federal government does; that the States and The People must submit to the federal government no matter what it does; that only the federal government may question the federal government; that the federal government created by the Constitution is the exclusive and final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it; and the opinion of five supreme Court judges, not the Constitution, is the sole measure of its powers.

Such people may not understand the distinction between abuses of delegated powers (e.g., unwise bankruptcy laws – Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 4), for which election of better Representatives is the answer; andusurpations of powers which have not been delegated and are thus outside the lawful reach of the federal government (e.g., Obamacare), for which nullification is the proper answer. When any branch of the federal government steps outside of the Constitution to make laws or “rules” or issue “orders” or “opinions” which exceed their delegated powers; the States must resort to those original rights which pre-date & pre-exist Our Constitution to nullify such usurpations by the federal government of undelegated powers.

4. Others who claim special knowledge on this subject insist that a single State may not nullify any act of the federal government; that only a majority of the States acting in concert may do so.

They overlook (among other things) the nature of the laws protested in the Kentucky & Virginia Resolutions. Those Resolutions addressed laws made by Congress which purported to grant to the President certain dictatorial powers over “aliens” and “seditious words”. The States have no means of stopping the President from enforcing such laws since the President has the raw power to send out armed thugs to arrest people by night; and then to prosecute, convict, & execute them in secret tribunals and chambers. The States may object – but they can’t stop it. The supreme Court may denounce it, but can’t stop it. Only Congress can put an end to it by repealing its usurpatious law and by impeaching & removing a usurping President (Federalist No. 66, 2nd para & No. 77, last para).

But when Congress by means of a law (which is outside the scope of its delegated powers); or the President by means of an executive order (which is outside the scope of his delegated powers); or federal executive departments by means of administrative rules (which they are altogether prohibited by Art. I, Sec. 1 from making); or the supreme Court by means of opinions which contradict Our Constitution; purport to require THE STATES  or THE PEOPLE and THE CHURCHES to do something, or stop doing somethingthen of course THE STATES – on an individual basis – have both the POWER and the DUTY (imposed by their Art. VI, cl. 3 Oaths of Office) to nullify such usurpatious acts within the boundaries of their States.

These Model Resolutions set forth the Authorities on which they are based, so that State Legislators and Citizens may propose them in their State Legislatures with complete confidence that Our Framers “have their backs”. PH


1 We can get rid of him earlier if we send enough people to Congress in 2016 with the spine to impeach & convict him and Biden. The Federalist Papers (cited above) are clear that Presidents should be impeached & removed for usurpations of power.

2 See the Minutes of March 4, 1825 of the Board of Visitors of the University of Virginia  (Thomas Jefferson & James Madison were present) where they voted to make The Federalist Papers one of the texts books for the Law School:

“Resolved that it is the opinion of this board that as to … the distinctive principles of the government of our own state, and of that of the US. the best guides are to be found in 1. the Declaration of Independance, as the fundamental act of union of these states. 2. the book known by the title of `The Federalist’, being an authority to which appeal is habitually made by all, and rarely declined or denied by any as evidence of the general opinion of those who framed, and of those who accepted the Constitution of the US. on questions as to it’s genuine meaning. 3. the Resolutions of the General assembly of Virginia in 1799. on the subject of the Alien and Sedition laws, which appeared to accord with the predominant sense of the people of the US. 4. the Valedictory address of President Washington, as conveying political lessons of peculiar value. and that in the branch of the school of Law, which is to treat on the subject of Civil polity, these shall be used as the text and documents of the school.” [pages 82-83, boldface added]. PH




America, How Did We Screw Things Up So Badly?

November 12th, 2012 by


Neal Ross

The title of this piece is something I have been asking myself for quite some time now. I know that I am not the only one who sees it, but sometimes I feel as though I am among an ever diminishing few who can see that our country is slowly but surely self destructing. In 1781 Thomas Jefferson provided us a hint as to what could bring this about. From his Notes on the State of Virginia, " It is the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigor. A degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats to the heart of its laws and constitution."

          Be ye Republican or Democrat, like it or not, our country was founded upon certain principles which allowed us to become great among nations. As long as we adhered to those principles, did not tinker with the plan so to speak, we would continue to be great. But, unfortunately we have forgotten those principles and allowed evil and corrupt men to gain the seats of power, resulting in the mess we now find ourselves in.

          In an essay published in 1748, Samuel Adams stated that "[N]either the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt. He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man."

          That job, the selecting of wise and virtuous men, was bestowed upon us, the electorate. But, how are we to accomplish it with any level of proficiency when the majority of the populace are totally ignorant of the principles upon which this country was founded, and when we allow our emotions or needs dictate who we will cast our votes for?

          Now I am not saying people today are stupid, but they are ignorant. Being ignorant simply means that they are lacking knowledge or education in general or in a specific subject. But whose fault is that when knowledge is readily available? Whose fault is that when people will spend all day glued to a television watching sporting events, but they won't take the time to pick up a book and read something that may educate and inform them?

          To put it plainly, the fault lies with us, the American people. We have allowed our government to grow into this monstrous beast that devours our liberty and seeks to enslave us. We have not held those whose job it was to protect our rights and liberty accountable.

          It doesn't matter who is in office, I always hear two things, and they are quite similar. First, people say that the guy in office inherited this mess from the guy before him, and secondly, we have to give the guy a chance to fix the mess left to him by his predecessor.

          That alone shows how ignorant people are as to how our system of government was supposed to function. According to the Constitution the president cannot create law, that power is delegated solely to Congress. The president can either sign a bill into law, or veto it, nothing more. So, when people cast their vote for a presidential candidate, be they Republican or Democrat, based upon all the things this person says they will do, then they do not know how our government is supposed to work. Instead they should be voting for Senators and members of the House who will push forward bills to do these things.

          However, like it or not, we are a nation of laws, with the Constitution being the Supreme Law of the land. In the 1866 Supreme Court case of Ex Parte Milligan, the court ruled, " The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of men than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism."

          As I was growing up I would walk down the hall and pass a framed needlepoint that my mother had made and hung on the wall. I later found out that it was a quote taken from John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address. It said, " And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you ­ ask what you can do for your country." How many people go to the polls today and cast their vote with that thought in mind?

          There is a quote that is supposedly attributed to a Scottish Lawyer named Alexander Fraser Tytler which best describes the process that is occurring in America today, " A democracy will continue to exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.  From then on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." With our nation currently being $16 trillion in debt, I would say we are well on our way to fulfilling that prediction.

          Again, who is to blame for all this? You could say it is our elected officials, but that is like saying who is responsible for an unruly kid, the child, or the parents whose job it was to watch him and discipline him when he misbehaves?

          So, how did all this happen, how did we let the greatest country on earth to go from a land where our rights and liberty was of paramount importance to a land where we are controlled and regulated by the very agents who are sworn to protect our rights? It is pretty simple, and can be summed up by something Josef Stalin once said, " America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."

          You may be saying that communism died with the fall of the Berlin wall and the ensuing collapse of the Soviet Union. Not so! Just because a person does not come down sick does not mean that viruses do not surround them. Communism is alive and well, and is slowly destroying this country.

          I know that many of those reading this do not remember the height of the Cold War, but one of the Soviet Leaders, Nikita Khrushchev once said ," I once said, "We will bury you," and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you."

          There was a guy named Ernest Cuneo, who aside from being a professional football player, was a lawyer, newspaperman, and intelligence liaison. In 1969 he wrote that, in his farewell address, Vladimir Lenin stated, " Take your example from the good housewife who finds use for even a broken shoestring. A good Communist finds use for everything, and nothing is more useful than a useful idiot." And believe me, America is full of useful idiots these days.

          I wonder, how many people have sat down and read the 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto? In this pamphlet Marx talks about how a capitalist society would eventually be replaced by socialism, and then eventually communism. In Section Two of his manifesto, Marx lists 10 things that must occur for socialism, and eventually communism, to take over in a capitalist society. Take a few moments to think about these things, and then ask yourself where America is headed.   

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.

What do you think the Bureau of Land Management and all the zoning laws are about? Do some research into allodial titles as well if you think YOU truly own your land.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

And yet we constantly hear that the rich, or the bourgeoisie as Marx called them, are not paying their fair share.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheretance.

We're on our way with this with estate taxes or probate laws.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

What have I been writing about for all these years? The Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, NDAA, all designed to label ANYONE who disagrees with the policy of their government as a terrorist threat, (rebel).

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

Two words, Federal Reserve.

6. Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.

Here again we have the Department of Transportation, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Interstate Commerce Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission, not to mention a whole slew of Presidential Executive Orders, which I have also written about in the past.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of the Interior, the EPA, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service all sound like governmental control of the land to me.

8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

Does minimum wage sound familiar? How about these volunteer work forces President Obama mentioned during his first run at president in 08? What about Labor Unions, don't they sound like industrial armies in that they 'urge' their members to vote for certain laws or candidates?

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country.

What about the slow death of privately owned farms and the growth of huge entities like Monsanto? Or you could check out the Planning Reorganization Act of 1949, and Executive Orders 11,647 and 11731 as well as Public Law 89-136 all of which provide for forced relocation and forced sterilization programs.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

This is where they screwed us over royally, and I'd like to take a bit more time discussing this one.

          Almost every single founding father, at one point or another, discussed the importance of educating the people as to the values of liberty and the principles upon which our republic was founded.

          Samuel Adams said, " No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved."

          John Adams said, "Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom."

          Dr. Benjamin Rush said, " Freedom can exist only in the society of knowledge. Without learning, men are incapable of knowing their rights."

          Noah Webster said, " Every child in America should be acquainted with his own country. He should read books that furnish him with ideas that will be useful to him in life and practice. As soon as he opens his lips, he should rehearse the history of his own country."

          James Madison said, " Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives. Learned Institutions ought to be favorite objects with every free people. They throw that light over the public mind which is the best security against crafty and dangerous encroachments on the public liberty."

          Thomas Jefferson said, " I think by far the most important bill in our whole code is that for the diffusion of knowledge among the people. No other sure foundation can be devised, for the preservation of freedom and happiness…"

          And finally, James Monroe, the fifth President of the United States for those who may not have heard his name before, once said, " It is only when the people become ignorant and corrupt, when they degenerate into a populace, that they are incapable of exercising their sovereignty. Usurpation is then an easy attainment, and an usurper soon found. The people themselves become the willing instruments of their own debasement and ruin."

          So you tell me, pupils of the public indoctrination, I mean education system, how well do YOU understand the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? The easiest way for a government to assume powers over the people they are supposed to represent is if the people do not know the limits to the powers of their government in the first place. If government gains control of the educational system, they can dictate how much our children are taught about the principles upon which this nation was founded.  We trusted government to do what is right, to educate our kids regarding these vital principles, but government let us down. While we were too busy watching TV whole generations of kids have been indoctrinated into these socialist principles and now we have an army of voting youth who are of the belief that it is, in fact, the government's responsibility to take care of them, to make the playing field level for everyone. And if you care to look it up, that is what communism is all about, creating a society where everyone is equal.

          You may think that by voting Republican or Democrat you are changing directions this country takes, but you would be wrong. Since 1945 the Democrats have had complete control of government; the Presidency and both houses of Congress eleven times. Twice have the Republicans enjoyed such an advantage. Yet, on fourteen other occasions there were divisions among the powers of government. In some instance there was a Republican President with the Democrats having control of Congress, or vice versa. Other times the Democrats would hold the Senate, while the Republicans controlled the House.

          So you can't blame either party, because a sitting president has the authority to veto any legislation which is destructive to the principles upon which this country was founded. Sitting members of Congress can vote against any law which violates the Constitutional limits to their power or infringes upon our rights. Yet NONE of this has happened. BOTH parties are equally to blame, and we are more to blame because we cared more about what was on TV than reading the writings of our founders and voting according to our conscience, and not for the lesser of two evils.

          And remember what Stalin said about our resistance being threefold? Well think about the spiritual life of this nation. Look to see how God has been chased out of our schools, our thoughts, and our hearts. Is it any wonder this country is falling apart at the seams?

          From his Notes on the State of Virginia Thomas Jefferson said, " All the powers of government, legislative, executive, and judiciary, result to the legislative body…The concentrating these in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic government. It will be no alleviation that these powers will be exercised by a plurality of hands, and not by a single one. 173 despots would surely be as oppressive as one." He may as well have been talking about the 535 members of Congress and the one President we have in our federal government, as they all seek the same thing, more power for them, and more bondage for us.

          And finally, this would not be complete if I did not mention the subject of immigration. I know that you all believe in this whole theory that this nation was built by immigrants. But in Federalist 2, John Jay had something to say about that. He stated, " With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence."

          Now you look at the influx of immigrants into this country today, both legal and illegal, do they all have the same religion, the same language, the same thoughts on the principles of government, and the same in our manners and customs? I think not.

          From the Children of the Crucible, Theodore Roosevelt said, "From the melting pot of life in this free land all men and woman of all nations who come hither emerge as Americans and nothing else. They must have renounced completely and without reserve all allegiance to the land from which they or their forefathers came. And it is a binding duty on every citizen of this country in every important crisis to act solidly with all his fellow Americans, having regard only to the honor and interest of America, treating every other nation purely on its conduct in that crisis, without reference to his ancestral predilections or antipathies. If he does not act, he is false to the teachings and lives of Washington and Lincoln; he is not entitled to any part or lot in our country and he should be sent out of it."

          But no, we must be politically correct, we must practice multiculturalism and respect the traditions of our immigrants. Would their country do the same for us? No, this is America and by God if they come here they play by our rules or they can go home! So what we have is not a melting pot where all immigrants come out as Americans, but an ethnic mix where people come here expecting America to provide them with all the benefits they have not worked a day in their life to earn, and at the same time they walk around protesting how bad this country is. It makes me sick!

          But there we have it, that is what has gone wrong in America. There are two final quotes that I would like to leave you with as I close out this long winded tirade. First, from the Declaration of the Causes and Necessities of Taking Up Arms, " Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage on them." And secondly, John Adams once said, "But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."

           Well, there you have it, what has gone wrong with our founders experiment as to whether a people could be trusted to govern themselves. This last election, in which Barack Obama readily won over Mitt Romney, (not that Mitt Romney was such a great choice either), proved how far this country has fallen. When a candidate whose job performance has been pathetic, at best, who still has unanswered questions as to his eligibility to even hold office, who has two current scandals to resolve, both resulting in the loss of American lives, (the Benghazi attack and the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry), yet can easily be re-elected, it shows that the majority of the voting public are totally ignorant as to what this country stands/stood for.

          America, you will be held accountable for what you have allowed to happen, either in this life, or the next. For America HAS fallen, our constitution is all but dead, and the fat lady is warming up, getting ready to take the stage.

 Comments may be sent to: bonsai@syix.com

If you have any comments, please post them here: http://www.zombie-slayer.com/neal/


Neal is probably the best of citizen commentators, and has the highest regard for our freedom as anyone I have ever met, or read. All citizens regardless of intelligence or education WOULD DO WELL to learn from his articles, and then email him with your support. Those of you who disagree with his logic and knowledge WOULD DO WELL to kiss my ass, and go to hell. I’m sick of American degeneracy. When the cowards are hurting bad enough, just maybe, they will defend their freedom. But, I’m not holding my breath.



Four Ways The Fake Media Creates A False Reality

November 10th, 2012 by






1. Hyper-attention On A Particular Event, Issue, and Mantra.

The mainstream media exclusively focuses on a single storyline about an event or an issue, which has the effect of marginalizing other points of view that are equally valid, if not more so. Narratives, not facts and objective data, have taken center stage in the aspiring journalist’s mind. Journalists and editors who oversee the making of the news play the same role as screenwriters in the filmmaking process. Their power stems from the fact that the public looks at news as “real,” whereas they know movies are totally fake. But news in the United States and the West is the farthest thing from being real.

Journalists who are in the service of the U.S. intelligence community and other government intelligence agencies are messengers for power. Their job is to repeat government narratives and government mantras. For example, Al-Qaeda is a mantra, not an international terror organization that is at war with America. Read, “Al Qaeda And Human Consciousness: Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda. . . . An Incessant And Repetitive Public Discourse,” by Prof Michel Chossudovsky. The “Arab Spring” is another mantra that Washington has used to fulfill its foreign policy objectives in the Middle East.

The latest mantra that the mainstream media is using in a domestic context is the “fiscal cliff.” Media messengers for the tyrannical establishment do not discuss how the Federal Reserve’s private moneymachine, Wall Street bailouts, and the military-industrial complex’s wars have caused the skyrocketing of U.S. debt. They just keep repeating “fiscal cliff,” and then offer bipartisan solutions that will benefit the banksters in power while destroying the living standards of middle class taxpayers and workers.

By focusing on the “fiscal cliff,” rather than the Grand Canyon of Deception that is the unconstitutionalFederal Reserve system, the mainstream media legitimizes the looting and pillaging of the American people by the transnational banksters.

2. Production of Fake News Reports.

War propaganda is not a new feature of warfare, but the modern Western mass media has taken this art to its highest technological development. What the AmericanIsraeli, and Western media accomplished on the day of September 11, 2001, is simply astonishing. 9/11 was a riveting Hollywood production, from start to finish, from morning to nightfall. It made Hitler’s propaganda team weep from the beyond. But the official 9/11 story is just one example of how news is manufactured by the government in tandem with the press.

Examples abound in Syria. Propaganda stations like CNN, Al Jazeera, and BBC have reported on fake massacres by the Syrian government, made up the size of anti-Assad protests, and generally exaggerated the intensity of the hatred for Assad within Syria. We cannot rely on the official number of the people who have died in the conflict because the malicious media routinely makes up figures and repeats them until they become accredited as facts.

Up to now, the Western media has painted a very rosy picture of the anti-Assad “rebels” who are foreign-funded Jihadist terrorists, while minimizing the suffering and needless deaths of Assad’s supporters like Syrian-Palestinian actor Mohamad Rafea.

We can clearly see that the revolution in Syria is an imagined revolution and not a real revolution. The Arab Spring is not like an organic plague that spreads from country to country. The U.S., Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia transported the Arab Spring into Syria, and it met resistance from the politically aware Syrian people and the powerful Syrian state. This is natural because there was never a demand for a violent Jihadi revolution in Syria. The anti-government sentiments in Syria never reached the level of despair, unlike in Egypt, Bahrain, and other countries in the region.

3. Omission of Facts and Alternative Opinions.

Since the mainstream media operates in a politically constructed universe, facts that contradict the word of the U.S. government are suppressed. The integrity of the fake universe is preserved at the cost of destroying the real universe.

Those who have a different opinion of events that transformed America like 9/11 and the 2008 bankster bailout are ridiculed as crazy. When you express alternative opinions that conflict with the official narratives of the U.S. government you are accused of being paranoid, conspiracy theorizing, aiding Al-Qaeda, and drumming up fear for ratings. To learn more about how media propaganda against dissent works, read,“The Propaganda Battlefield: Militants Abroad, Conspiracy Theorists At Home.”

Canceling out reality may work for a while, but it has the last word. It is getting harder for the mainstream media to ridicule independent investigators as conspiracy theorists for pointing out that the U.S. and its dictatorial allies are sponsoring Jihadi terrorism against Syria. Even mainline journalists are beginning to admit it. How can they not? It is pretty tough to cover-up reality.

There are videos of Jihadist mercenaries mass executing civilians and the Western media spin machine is powerless in the face of this kind of explosive evidence. They will just look foolish if they say mass executions by anti-government terrorists isn’t happening and that all the blame for the crisis in Syria falls on Assad’s shoulders.

4.  Mass Indoctrination of The Public Through Myth and Ritual.

The example of the 9/11 ritual proves that we think mythically, not rationally. It is easy for a totalitarian government with vast media resources to condition the public and put it under a spell indefinitely. The trouble arises with the arrival of a competing narrative, one that is actually based on scientific facts as opposed to propaganda.

But a sustained media campaign to brainwash the public in combination with the trauma of terror can effectively keep the public under the government’s spell for a very long time. Read, “Seven Ways Events Like 7/7 Empower Socialized Warfare,” to learn about the effectiveness of false flag terrorism. Also, read,“7 Reasons Washington’s Grand Counter-Terrorism Myths Persist In The Face of Evidence.”

What is it about mass public rituals that galvanize political leaders and embolden them to take radical action that otherwise would not be accepted by the majority of the public? They are trigger events that create mass panic and chaos, resulting in greater government power over the minds of spellbound citizens. Martin S. Day, author of the book, ‘The Many Meanings of Myth,’ says there are six sociological purposes of cultural and social rituals, and you can read them here.

When an entire civilization is emotionally and intellectually invested in a particular myth, it is nearly impossible to divorce the civilization from the myth. How has the 9/11 myth benefited Western civilization? In terms of war, the West has been politically able to wage aggression against numerous innocent countries in the Middle East by holding up the 9/11 myth to the rest of the world as a moral justification for its war crimes.

But America and the West has also been destroyed because of the 9/11 myth and the illegitimate global war on terrorism. Economically, politically, morally, intellectually, and spiritually, Western governments are reaching the point of bankruptcy.




Be Afraid America, Very Afraid

November 9th, 2012 by






By Dave Hodges

How does a President who used an ambassador to run guns through the CIA, to al-Qaeda, and then was complicit in his murder and then fired two senior military officers who tried to save the Ambassador’s life and then manage to get himself re-elected to the highest office in the land? Well, in a word, ignorance is the answer. I fear that America is about ready to pay a steep price for her slumbering ways.

The abovementioned transgression should be enough to put Obama in irons for the next 30 years. Yet, the American people rewarded him with another presidential term..

After you read the following short list of Obama transgressions against the Constitution and the American people, ask yourself how safe do you feel with four more years of Obama?

Obama is not even a citizen of the United States, as determined by several researchers including Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff, Joe Arpaio. Obama’s long form birth certificate was declared a forgery. Yet, America elected this illegal alien to a second term.

Under the Obama presidency, America has seen her national debt double and financial collapse is right around the corner. We have seen our allies jump ship in record numbers. We have over half the country on welfare. The Obama administration paid 22 billion dollars to help GM relocate most of its operations to China after the American people bailed GM out in 2008. Half of all college graduates cannot find fulltime work and most are saddled with crippling debt through their predatory college student loans.

Obama has closed a multitude of coal plants, thus making energy prices skyrocket. He has funded Solyndra and Pat Stryker’s Abound Solar with our tax money, to the tune of over a billion dollars, and not one kilowatt of solar energy was produced. The President is now leading the newest energy scam in the bio-fuel industry, namely, algae in which our nation is subsidizing millions, and soon to be billions to algae proponents including Warren Buffet, George Soros and Al Gore. The one thing that these men don’t tell you is that it takes 300 gallons of water to produce one gallon of algae gasoline.  And of course, under Obama, gas prices have more than doubled.

Obama’s depopulation leanings are expressed in his national health care law which, in one fell swoop, placed nearly 20% of the economy under socialist control. Under Obama-care, birth control services are mandatory. Lifestyles which do not add to the birthrate are honored (eg transsexual) and given preferential treatment by the Obama administration. Obama’s health care death panels will help America continue its slide in life-expectancy where we are presently 51st in the world despite spending 10 times more than the next dozen nations combined!

It is clear that Obama is not a Christian and honors every faith but the worship of Jesus Christ. Obama has kneeled at the feet of our enemies and I believe that he ultimately serves humanity’s greatest enemy, Satan.

The President pushed for the NDAA which allows him to disappear and murder political opponents and critics such as Andrew Breitbart. Obama’s executive order entitled the National Defense Resources Preparedness, allows Obama, at the stroke of the pen, to enact civilian conscription and food confiscation along with the complete control of all industry by government. Under Obama, FEMA camps became operationalized and staffed. Does anyone ask why? Additionally, the TSA has taken its VIPR program to the streets in order to sexually assault more Americans in the name of liberty. If Obama has this much power at the end of his first term, what nightmare scenario will come in his second term?

As I have previously, Obama is an avowed Communist. Former communist party leader, Frank Davis was his father. Obama had his Harvard education paid for and had his political career launched by former Weathermen Underground thugs, Bernardine Dorne and Bill Ayers. Obama was raised to be a communist and now this despot has four more years to make the White House more like Red Square.

What could we have been thinking on election day? The fact is we were not thinking .The 47% of the people who are on Obama’s welfare voted to keep the federal gravy train rolling. Many of the 65% of young adults who cannot find Great Britain on a map, believe Obama when he says we can spend our way out of a depression. We are the victims of our own ignorance.

Nero fiddled while Rome burned.  Obama will likely be golfing the day our economy becomes insolvent under his leadership. And that is when, the 80-90% of ignorant Americans will soon come to learn what many of us in the alternative medial already know, Obama passed the NDAA, The National Resources Preparedness and the death panels of Obama-care for a reason. Coupled with the fact that Obama has issued ten times more executive orders than all of the Presidents combined in our entire history which sets up the potential for a total dictatorship in his next 4 years in which I predict we will see absolute government by presidential decree. Be afraid America, be very afraid.


Obama signed an executive order to create virtual dictatorship

“When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny”.

Thomas Jefferson




Obama Wins A Second Term Now What?

November 7th, 2012 by


By Ron Holland


I'm certainly glad the election is finally over. While I have loved politics my entire life, this presidential election has gone on for over three years, including the GOP primaries, and I've had my fill of meaningless slogans and counter-slogans, lies and counter-lies. I had to quit watching political news the last few weeks, as I thought I would become physically sick if I watched any more establishment political "experts" give their required opinions and propaganda bites.

The 2012 presidential election has been like a ballgame hyped and built up over three years. We are programed to cheer and act out our sheep-like roles in partisan politics when, like the game, unless we have money bet on the outcome the actual winner will have absolutely no impact on our lives.

This was destined to be a close, statistically tied election, as get out the vote efforts included repetitive harping on its life-changing importance and the evils of the opposition candidates and party. The bottom line is that voting percentages generate credibility for the failed American political system.

"There's not a dime's worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican parties." George Wallace, 1966 Alabama governor and presidential candidate.

Note it now takes 71 cents to equal the purchasing power of a dime in 1966 – if you believe the false inflation statistics out of Washington. Actually, I could buy a soft drink for a dime in 1966 whereas today it is closer to $1.50. Check house prices even with the pullback or college tuition if you want an accurate inflation estimate.

It is reasonable to expect from Obama's second term more of the same as the first four years. The two main US political parties promote nearly identical policies; nothing will change from earlier Bush and Clinton administration policies. Of course, there will be a burst of optimism from Democrats and the usual rallying cries for everybody to come together to meet the challenges of the moment. This is just the usual garbage fed to the voting public after every presidential election.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but both presidents and the representatives we reelect to Congress only represent the powerful banking and economic interests that control the federal government and use it to further their power elite agenda. Real, productive citizens can only look to their government representatives to solve minor bureaucratic issues on lost checks, eligibility for this program or that or to listen only to their complaints and agenda.

In reality, the Senate and House of Representatives by necessity – except in the case of those few with actual philosophical convictions on the right or the left – only represent and govern based on the financial handouts and doors opened by powerful interests. This is the only way they can be reelected.

Why Romney Lost

Romney lost for two main reasons: First, as he correctly noted during the campaign, 47 percent of American families are dependent on government handouts and they voted for what was in their own best interests. Democracy is mob rule and the 47 percent, although with the best of intentions, are still only a mob out to get what they can from others who have earned or produced the wealth in the private sector.

"There are 47 percent who are with [Obama], who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it." – Mitt Romney

Still, there is a positive outcome with this depressing statistic. First, many government employees and those on the dole understand the problems of bureaucracy far better than Americans in the private sector because they are caught in the government trap themselves. They often have the courage to even vote against their best interests because they see what it has done to them personally.

Every TSA agent and government employee in non-essential services outside of the armed forces, real police and fire protection and real teachers – not the hundreds of thousands of unionized, make-work employees who use the system – are simply parasites.

Second, the GOP leadership antagonized the 10 percent of the Republican Party electorate who supported Ron Paul for President. Of course, the establishment is still deathly scared of the Ron Paul movement and their harsh treatment and the subsequent blowback on November 6 guarantees any discussion here will be verboten and seldom mentioned for obvious reasons. While some voted for Romney, a few – as the returns show – voted third-party and many like me just sat home on election day disgusted at the entire political charade. Romney lost because he needed a majority of this 10 percent to win yet those controlling his campaign simply threw this voting block away because it threatened powerful central bankingneocon and moneyed interests supporting the GOP.

While Romney would have made a better president than Obama in at least his rhetoric, as he pays lip service to conservative Republican values, in reality his neocon controllers would probably have made him a disaster in foreign policy.

And so over the next four years the people will be provoked and buy more guns they will never have the courage to use to defend themselves against an all-powerful government. The GOP will raise more money using faux social issues and an agenda they never really have any interest in standing up for. Obama will be painted as an evil, Muslim-born in God-knows-where socialist when in actuality he has no more power than Romney would have had to restore the America we loved and respected.

The game will go on until the time is up for our nation. In the meantime, austerity measures will dramatically increase, benefits and promises will be lost by the poor and remaining middle class citizens who really need them and taxes will rise, as will the risk of gold and wealth confiscation. Obama will be blamed, just as Romney would have been blamed had he been elected president, for this is how our regulatory/debt democracy works today in the 21st century. A failed system of central bank control leading a failed economy, a failing currency and a controlled system totally divorced from control or limitation by the citizens of America.

The Solution is to Change the Political Structure

The solution is a return to a limited, decentralized confederation form of government like our first legitimate American government, the Articles of Confederation. One that is responsible to the people and ultimately controlled by the voters with the iron-clad political tools of initiative and referendum like exists in Switzerland today, where voters have the right to reject legislation and laws or enact laws outside the power of controlled legislative, judiciary and executive branches of government. Until we return to the Articles of Confederation, America and our liberties are doomed to extinction by the hidden control of international banking and economic elites.

After the election you can expect appeals from "so-called" conservatives or libertarians wanting your hard-earned money to support this or that cause. They will claim time is running out, the next election is the most important in your lifetime, etc. Time is not running out; it ran out long ago, and voting for either party or most candidates is just an exercise in futility supporting the corrupt system that rules over you. We are serfs and mere subjects to a system and few understand or even recognize the control over us.

If you want to be a free people again educate yourself on the Swiss system of government and work for a return to the government for which our patriot founding fathers risked their lives and property, the Articles of Confederation. Supporting anything less is just deceiving ourselves and screwing our posterity. We may deserve the kind of government we have allowed to take over our country but our posterity deserve better.

The GOP Ron Paul for President campaigns in 2008 and 2012 clearly showed how the controlled, two-party system in the United States will allow no real opposition to its approved candidates in either party. You can bet your worthless vote that new Republican Party rules at the 2012 GOP convention and at the state level in the future will control any viable opposition candidates. The only current outlets for alternative political action are in doomed-to-fail third-party activities that are little more than allowed but controlled political opposition.

To restore the original American Republic, we must change the controlled monopoly political system of government that controls and destroys internally or externally all opposition. New candidates or even attempts at party control accomplish little when the same powerful interests control the political structure. We must work to remove the system in place and restore the limited government of our founding fathers, for they had devised a system that would work well today with our ease of transportation and communication.

Remember, our children and grandchildren deserve a better, more prosperous world and nation than we have left them at this point. It is time we as a generation man up for liberty to redeem ourselves in the tear-filled eyes of future generations. The American people must work peacefully to restore the Articles of Confederation now or else suffer the permanent consequences of the fall of America.


Mr. Holland is absolutely correct in all of the above. That’s what needs be done! HOWEVER, he did not tell the whole story! The division that exists in America is something that will never be corrected, without a permanent separation of the political classes, and a massive self-study of the things that have created their worldview being intentional by the power of the international Banking Cartel. America’s have been brainwashed, and became self centered to the point of being suicidal. Call it cognitive dissonance if you want, but it boils down to just being a bunch of stupid, stubborn, lazy, bastards, who really prefer being controlled. This old misanthropic curmudgeon would not bother to piss on their graves.