RIOT: Regiment Instituted to Overthrow Tyranny
RIOT: Regiment Instituted to Overthrow Tyranny
WHAT IS RIOT?
RIOT stands for Regiment Instituted to Overthrow Tyranny
WHAT IS OUR PURPOSE?
RIOT is here to wake America up to the evil traitors who have infiltrated our government as well as most of Europe. A hardcore global crime syndicate known as the Illuminati is setting up a global tyrannical dictatorship(AKA The New World Order). This has been in the works for over one hundred years and is close to becoming a reality. The Illuminati regulates who is eligible to come into power in all of the G8 Nations including the United States. The American chapter of the Illuminati is headed by former U.S. President and dark lord of the CIA, George Herbert Walker Bush and Democratic Party puppeteer, David Rockefeller. The Illuminati is made up of many elite families and secret societies. The Skull and Bones Fraternity at Yale, Bohemian Grove, The Trilateral Commission, The Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderbergs, and the newest, most dangerous group Project for a New American Century, AKA Neo-Cons,are American Illuminati groups.The Neo-Cons are led by former Reagan Secretary of State, George Schutlz. In order to put their plans into effect, they have to fool and scare the people into getting behind it. To do that, they have to use what is called Problem, Reaction, Solution. Meaning they create a crisis, get a reaction from the people and then offer a solution which is to get them to give up their rights and their constitution in order to be "protected" by their government. On this site, we will document such events throughout history and ones that have happened recently especially the horrible attacks on September 11 2001.We will explain who was behind them and why.We will also explain the agenda of these creatures and the history behind their organization. We will discuss the criminal history of the Bush family as well as their Nazi connections. We will discuss documents such as the USAPatriot Act that have seriously eroded the constitution. We will talk about who stood to gain from these horrible events. We will discuss the up comming police state in America and explain the Orwellian nightmare surveilance program and cashless society control grid that is already being set up as well as their plan to exterminate 80% of the world's population. Most Importantly we will tell you how YOU can help fight these evil traitors and help restore the American republic and constitution. The skeleton of the New World Order is already in place in the form of the United Nations, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, and the World Health Organization. Continental superstates are the next step. The European Union, Asian Union, and African Union are already in place, as are plans for a North American Union. The globalists get their power from the central banks that they use to control nations. The central bank of the United States is the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is a private cabal, not a government agency. The government borrows money from the Federal Reserve and pays it back with interest, using the money it recieves from the equally illegal and unconstitutional IRS which steals that money from you and me.
There is still time to stop these creatures from destroying America and enslaving humanity. The only way that they can pull this off is if we unwittingly allow them to. The global elite know that the American people are their greatest threat. We are the only thing that can stop them now.. We the people outnumber them by 500 to 1 but they think that they can sell us on our own enslavement. Unfortunately, so far it is working and time is running out. They do not have the manpower to enslave us if we resist. If you cut off the head, the body dies. The New World Order cannot survive if we abolish the Federal Reserve, which our congress has the constitutional right to do. If we do not wake up and take action now, we are headed for one of the greatest sadnesses that we could ever imagine. TOTAL TYRANNY, TOTAL ENSLAVEMENT, TOTAL DEHUMANIZATION!!!! Read this site and inform yourself. Get involved now!
-Col. South: RIOT Commander in Chief.
Contact us at: firstname.lastname@example.org
NOTE TO ALL RIOT FANS: Our Facebook page is back up. You can access and add us back through the "Facebook etc." link above.
CISPA sponsor: Obama will back down from his veto promise
By Kevin Collier on June 19, 2012
Mike Rogers (R-Michigan), the U.S. Representative responsible for introducing the Cyber Intelligence Security Protection Act to Congress, said that President Obama will sign the bill if it passes the Senate, despite an earlier White House promise to veto.
"[I]f we can get a bill on information-sharing to the president's desk, he'll sign it. I do believe that," Rogers said Monday after a panel discussion. CISPA passed the House of Representatives in April, and is expected to go before the Senate for a vote in late June or July.
In April, Obama's advisers released a statement that condemned CISPA for the exact reasons most privacy advocates have: that under the guise of protecting the country from cyber attacks, the bill would allow companies to share a wealth of otherwise private user information with the government, with little recourse for users.
However, as the Daily Dot noted in May, one of Obama's top advisers on cybersecurity, Howard Schmidt, retired a month after that statement's release. Schmidt was openly against CISPA, and he likely played a key role in shaping the White House's stance on the bill.
The White House has expressed a favorable stance to another cybersecurity bill, the Cybersecurity Act of 2012, which critics say violate citizens' privacy in ways similar to CISPA.
Joseph Lieberman (I-Connecticut), who introduced that bill to the Senate, has warned his colleagues that unless they vote on it by July, it likely won't pass.
Rogers also said that he thought CISPA could pass the Senate, but that Lieberman's bill couldn't. Lieberman has promised to retire in January and has said that passing a cybersecurity bill before then is his highest priority.
Once the "dust settles," Rogers predicted, Obama's only option to enforce U.S. cybersecurity will be to sign CISPA
Official Story Surrounding Manhunt for Boston Marathon Bombing Suspects Riddled with Inconsistencies
April 19, 2013
Source: Lee Rogers, BlacklistedNews.com
The events related to the Boston Marathon bombings are moving increasingly fast. Yesterday afternoon the FBI posted photos and video of two men that they claimed were connected to the bombings. Curiously enough the FBI said that people should pay attention only to the photos of these two men. This is despite the fact that there was a treasure trove of photos showing several suspicious looking people around the finish line right before the bombs went off. There were military types roaming around the finish line and a number of odd looking individuals carrying backpacks similar to what may have been used to carry the bombs. Thus far there has been no official explanation as to why there were military types roaming around the area of the finish line. There has also been no official explanation as to why there were strange drills and exercises being run in the general area of the Boston Marathon that have been reported by eyewitness accounts. As stated in my previous article pointing the finger at government involvement in these events, these types of drills are typically used as cover for a larger government sponsored terror operation as seen with events like the 9/11 attacks and the 7/7 bombings in London. If the government was more open and honest with what was actually taking place, people wouldn't be asking all of these questions. They are the ones that are fueling speculation and distrust by engaging the public in this manner.
Early this morning one of the suspects named Tamerian Tsarnaev was said to have died after the media reported that the suspects robbed a 7-Eleven convenient store, killed an MIT police officer, injured another transit officer and threw explosive devices as they tried to getaway. According to various media reports he was killed after being run over by a car that the other suspect his brother Dzkokhar Tsarnaev was driving as they tried to flee. There have also been other conflicting reports stating that the dead suspect may have blown himself up with a suicide bomb but at this point it is difficult to if any of these reports are even real. We are also being told that the two suspects are from a Russian area near Chechnya that came to the United States to kill people. If someone didn't know what was going on they would think the stories being reported were from some crazy Hollywood movie instead of real life events.
To be serious, why would these people try to rob a 7-Eleven and create all sorts of havoc knowing that their photo is plastered all over the news media? Not only that but why would these guys stay around the Boston area and decided to rob a store where numerous security cameras are in place? And all of this is happens only hours after the FBI puts out their photos as people of interest in the bombings?
More importantly, where is the video footage of the alleged robbery taking place? Why has that not been released? Right now the media is only showing us a photo of one of the suspects said to be at the Seven Eleven which doesn't even show the suspect carrying anything indicating that they were ready to rob the store. There are just too many holes in this story.
One of the most ridiculous aspects to what is unfolding is that it is now being reported that this Dzkokhar Tsarnaev individual allegedly became an American citizen on September 11th 2012. Are we really supposed to believe this bull shit? It is about as absurd as the young girl Christina Taylor Green who was allegedly killed during the Gabbie Giffords shooting incident that was said to have been born on September 11th 2001. Photos of the same girl only a few years older would emerge proving that the entire narrative surrounding her being killed was a lie. Specifically though, what are the odds that the September 11th date has such significance in all of these different incidents? It reeks of a poorly written movie script in their attempts to invoke the memories of the September 11th attacks with the viewing audience.
Police have ordered a virtual lockdown of the Boston area and surrounding towns in a massive manhunt for the remaining suspect. They've shutdown mass transit service throughout Boston and are asking people to not go out into public areas. In the end it is very likely that when all of this is over the official story will result with both suspects dead. Dead men tell no tales and it will give the public the satisfying conclusion that everyone wants. It almost feels like something out of the 1960s science fiction movie Fahrenheit 451 where the government fakes the death of the main character after he successfully escapes a police manhunt. His death was faked to give the public a proper conclusion.
Another puzzling aspect to this is why the FBI has not released any of the video footage from a security camera that was said to show one of these individuals dropping one of the backpack bombs in place before it exploded? One would think that this would be of particular interest to the public but there's been no transparency with this and other issues related to these events.
An Aunt of the suspects was interviewed by the corporate media and actually stated that she thought her nephews were being setup. She rightfully criticized the FBI for not supplying any real evidence indicating their guilt. She would go on to say that the only information the FBI has provided thus far indicating their potential involvement have been pictures with circles around their faces. Even though corporate media hacks like Anderson Cooper have dismissed her as "crazy" she is actually correct. The FBI hasn't produced any real evidence proving that either of these people were involved in placing the bombs. It is nothing more than empty rhetoric and the corporate media as they always do is just repeating what they are being told by government officials like its the holy gospel. In addition, other family members of the two suspects including their father have been interviewed and most of them couldn't fathom that they would be behind these attacks. The possibility that they have been framed is actually likely considering the lack of evidence presented by the FBI and the absurd story surrounding last night's events.
To top it all off it is comical that the government has been able to justify a complete shutdown of the public transportation system and even a no fly zone in and around the Boston area just to find a single 19 year old. They've even been running around conducting warantless door to door searches across the entire area. There are even reports that police are threatening the media who are trying to cover this story. Why would police be threatening the media? One would think that the police would want the media providing coverage of them getting the supposed bad guy but instead they are acting the exact opposite like they are trying to hide something. It is simply outrageous to see what's happening. Even if you don't believe that there is anything strange with the official story unfolding in the media, it is undeniable that the government has used this situation to justify a militarized police state presence all around Boston. In the days and weeks that follow, it is going to be of great interest to see what sort of garbage agenda the establishment tries to push through.
Mother Of Boston Bombing Suspects Says FBI Was In Contact With Her Son For Years
April 19, 2013
Zubeidat K. Tsarnaeva, the Boston bombing suspect's mother, thinks this whole thing is a set up.
Business Insider says: Tsarnaeva said that Tamerlan Tsarnaev got involved in "religious politics" five years ago, and that the FBI had previously contacted her about her son's activities.
"He was controlled by the FBI, like for three, five years," she said. "They knew what my son was doing, they knew what actions and what sites on the Internet he was going [to], they used to come...and talk to me...they were telling me that he was really a serious leader and they were afraid of him."
"How could this happen?...They were controlling every step of him, and they are telling today that this is a terrorist attack," she added.
Further she says:
"FBI, they were scared of my oldest son, they always told me that he's a leader...they are afraid of him because, you know, he is a leader, he talks about Islam a lot."
"They were talking to my son, and they called me officially and they told me that my son is an excellent boy and they have no problem with him," she added. "At the same time, they were telling me that...he is getting information on really extremists...sites, so they were very, very afraid of him. So that's why I think that this is a setup."
Busines Insider further says: "Tamerlan, 26, died Thursday night in a shootout with Boston Police. A manhunt is still underway for Tsarnaeva's younger son, Dzhoker, 19."
Boston Marathon Bombing: Who Do They Plan To Blame?
Brandon Smith alt-market.com
April 16, 2013
"You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." - Rahm Emanuel, former White House Chief Of Staff to Barack Obama
While many people might immediately dismiss the concept, any student of true and unadulterated history has to eventually admit this fact: Governments exploit crisis. Sometimes, they merely take advantage of the ensuing chaos and aftermath of a disaster they had nothing to do with directly. Other times, they create those disasters themselves in order to engineer social and political opportunity.
In regard to the recent bombing of the Boston Marathon, which killed three people and injured at least 140, I have asked "Who do they plan to blame?" The unaware and naïve will state that "They will blame the true culprit behind the attack, of course!" Unfortunately, in the past couple decades I have seen numerous terrorist attacks where the blame was NOT placed on the true culprit, or, the blame was extended to totally uninvolved groups and organizations in order to politicize the event. Governments (especially our government) squeeze each man-made disaster like a ripe papaya until every drop of sweet advantage can be collected. They use our fear and confusion as license to attack a predetermined list of targets that may or may not have had anything to do with the original event. They tell the story in a way that suits their end-line interests, and the last thing they are concerned with is helping the public to "understand". In the end, what average citizens see as an authoritative analysis on the facts from their "loving" leaders is in reality nothing more than an exercise in fantasy.
Now, the thought of persons and institutions within our government being malicious enough to create a terrorist event to be used to manipulate the public towards a certain end tends to bring out furious denial in some Americans. This is because those people with weak characters and an even weaker sense of identity tend to attach their egos to the collective. They live vicariously through the group, or the nation state, so that the State's accomplishments and trials become THEIR accomplishments and trails. To accuse the state of criminality is to accuse them of criminality.
The Boston bombing already has the makings of a subversive and highly exploitable false flag event, and certain undertones remind me of the now exposed Operation Gladio, a false flag program utilized by NATO governments (including the U.S.) for decades which involved multiple bombings and mass shootings of high traffic public areas across Europe that were then falsely blamed on "left-wing terrorists". The operation was exposed in the early 1990's by the Italian government, and then quickly swept into the dust bin of history.
Vincenzo Vinciguerra, a far-right terrorist linked to Gladio and currently serving a life-sentence for the car bomb murder of three policemen stated during sworn testimony on Gladio in March of 2001:
"You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game..."
"The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security. This is the political logic that lies behind all the massacres and the bombings which remain unpunished, because the state cannot convict itself or declare itself responsible for what happened..."
The strategy used by NATO was clear - terrorize the common population, target as many innocents as possible in places where they felt most comfortable and at ease, and drive the citizenry into the waiting arms of the establishment. The tactic creates the cancerous spread of public tension because the sense of "distance" from violence is removed. An attack could literally happen anytime, anywhere. A predetermined scapegoat enemy is then presented, completing the circle and galvanizing the people in the direction the establishment desires.
The methods used in Europe to demonize "left-wing" political movements could just as easily be used to demonize what some call "right-wing" political movements here in the U.S. Let's look at some of the facts surrounding the Boston incident so far:
Boston authorities and witnesses on the scene admit that bomb sniffing dogs and roof spotters were employed before the race even began. The local bomb squad was also coincidentally running a "controlled explosion drill" only one mile away from the attack:
Participants at the race were told repeatedly not to worry, and that a "training exercise" was taking place. In nearly every major terror attack since 9/11, from the U.S., to the UK and Spain, the government was running "training exercises and drills" fitting the EXACT description of the threat that then suddenly occurred in real life on the same day. Perhaps it is only an overtly reoccurring negative serendipity, but in my view, if the authorities are running a training exercise for a bombing in your town, it might be best to run for the hills before their little war-game becomes real yet again.
Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis also stated that authorities were not aware of any specific threats to the marathon before it began, which means that they are not presenting any claims that they had reason to believe a bombing might take place:
So, just to clarify, the Boston police on the suggestion of...someone, decided to run bomb squad training, bomb sniffing dogs, and rooftop spotters on the exact same day that the Boston Marathon happened to be bombed...just because?
I would add to this conundrum another question - With all those bomb sniffing dogs present, and with multiple devices now found on the scene, how did they not find at least one of the explosive packages before people were killed? Those dogs need to be fired, I suppose...
Along with the immediate strangeness of the attack, the timing is also rather perfect for the establishment.
April 15th is tax day across the nation, and Tax Protest Day sponsored annually by Tea Party organizations across the country also just happened to fall on the 15th this year. On top of this, in Massachusetts, Patriots Day (a civic holiday celebrating the battles of Lexington and Concord) is held on the third Monday of April every year, which just happened to be the 15th this year. Oath Keepers, a constitutional organization often wrongly attacked as a "domestic extremist group" by the DHS and
SPLC, just happened to have a large pro-freedom rally scheduled for the 19th of April at Lexington Green in Massachusetts. Are we starting to get the picture here?
Wash. State Bill Would Make Almost All Gun Owners Criminals
February 14, 2013
Washington state Sens. Ed Murray (D), Jeanne Kohl-Welles (D) and Adam Kline (D) have introduced new gun control legislation that goes far above and beyond what anyone would consider a simple sales ban.
The bill, S.B. 5737, proposes "banning the sale of assault weapons." According to the legislation, an "assault weapon" is any semiautomatic pistol, pump-action rifle or shotgun that can accept a detachable magazine, with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. Any magazine that accepts over 10 rounds itself will also be banned.
Also included in the definition is any rifle or shotgun with a pistol grip, a stock of any kind, a muzzle brake or muzzle compensator. The bill also prohibits the manufacturing, possessing, purchasing, selling or transferring of an assault weapons "conversion kit."
In order to continue to possess a so-called assault weapon that was owned before the assumed passing of the legislation, the person must "safely and securely" store the assault weapon and allow the sheriff of the county to, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to "ensure compliance," despite some apparent civil liberties implications related to the Fourth Amendment.
Not to mention the manpower, time and money that would be needed to search tens of thousands of Washington homes; it could prove to be very difficult and possibly divert much needed manpower from conducting actual police duties, especially in light of shrinking police department budgets.
The bill also gives no definition of what "safe and secure" storage consists of. The ownership and storage may only be done on property owned or immediately controlled by that person or while engaged in the "legal use" of the assault weapon at a duly licensed firing range. The bill does, however, exempt possession rules if the weapon is about to be "permanently relinquished to a law enforcement agency."
Any person who, after the effective date of the section, acquires title to an assault weapon by inheritance, bequest or succession must within thirty days either dispose of the weapon or have it permanently disabled so that it is incapable of discharging a projectile. Failure to comply will result in a class C felony.
Marshals, sheriffs, prison or jail wardens or their deputies, or other law enforcement officers of the state or another state will be exempt. Members of the armed forces of the United States, National Guard and organized services, are exempt when on duty. Also, any federal agent "allowed" to own an assault weapon is exempt as well.
This legislation is similar to a bill introduced by California Sen. Diane Feinstein (D) whose legislation would ban over 120 specifically named firearms.
Others such as President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have come out recently pushing for gun control. Holder gave a stern warning to gun traffickers, despite President Obama and him being involved in Operation Fast & Furious, a program that allowed tens of thousands of firearms to be given to drug cartels that took the lives of countless Mexicans and most notably U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
The program's supposed intent was to track where guns went in Mexico, but government emails leaked to CBS News showed that the intent appeared to be to use the resulting deaths to blame American gun owners and push gun control.
As CISPA Debate Rages Again, Obama Already Using Its Powers
February 13, 2013
Source: Activist Post
Just like most draconian legislation that politicians try to pass, the government has already been using the illegal powers and hopes to justify its actions with the passage of a new law. See warrantless wiretapping. Other even worse actions, like torture and assassinations of Americans without due process, are simply kept secret because they know a law for it would never be possible.
It was recently announced that the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, will once again be coming for a vote in the United States Congress. Lawmakers cited increased threats from hackers and cyber espionage as the motivation for its reintroduction.
This version of CISPA is reportedly identical to last year's version that easily passed in the House by a count of 248 to 168. Congressman Jared Polis (D-Colo), who voted against the measure, said the law "would waive every single privacy law ever enacted in the name of cybersecurity."
Other critics have pointed out that CISPA gives Obama a "kill switch" over the Internet in a "national cyberemergency".
CISPA has been roundly criticized by privacy advocates as enshrining the powers of the government to surveil and control the Internet in two overarching ways. First, government can lay claim to protecting "critical infrastructure" under which the Web has now been included. This opens the door for requesting that private companies like Google, Facebook and so far 800 others work openly on the initiative as well.
Both attempts to pass it in the Senate in 2012 narrowly failed with the last vote of 51-47 occurring in November which was closer than its 52-46 August vote.
After its failure, the White House and CISPA co-sponsor Joe Lieberman warned the public that Obama would enact an executive order if lawmakers won't pass the bill.
Although Obama has yet to issue a formal executive order, The Washington Post reported that Presidential Obama signed a secret cybersecurity presidential directive: Presidential Policy Directive 20 essentially giving himself all the power that CISPA seeks to legitimize:
Presidential Policy Directive 20 establishes a broad and strict set of standards to guide the operations of federal agencies in confronting threats in cyberspace, according to several U.S. officials who have seen the classified document and are not authorized to speak on the record. The president signed it in mid-October.
The new directive is the most extensive White House effort to date to wrestle with what constitutes an "offensive" and a "defensive" action in the rapidly evolving world of cyberwar and cyberterrorism, where an attack can be launched in milliseconds by unknown assailants utilizing a circuitous route. For the first time, the directive explicitly makes a distinction between network defense and cyber-operations to guide officials charged with making often-rapid decisions when confronted with threats.
The reality is that much of CISPA's privacy-shattering policies already are taking place under the FISA Amendments Act which Obama reauthorized for an additional 5 years. As the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported back in March:
the FAA is the statute Congress passed giving immunity to telecom companies despite their participation in the NSA's massive warrantless wiretapping program, which the New York Times first exposed in 2005. EFF and a host of other civil liberties groups have been involved in litigation challenging the constitutionality of warrantless wiretapping for years. (Source)
The extent of warrantless wiretapping and surveillance already being shared between the government and private companies has been exposed by The Washington Post, as well as former NSA whistleblowers William Binney and Thomas Drake, and former AT&T technician Mark Klein.
The Post's investigation revealed such a massive overlap of government and corporate interests that it is already operating free of transparency and oversight. Their findings were appropriately titled, "A hidden world, growing beyond control."
Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States. (Source)
Perhaps it is because of the exposure these whistleblowers have given that CISPA aims to go a step further and give corporations the power to prevent hard evidence leaks. As Stephen C. Webster of Rawstory states:
Imagine if Bank of America knew that WikiLeaks had obtained a cache of its internal documents the very instant that transmission was made, and a financial blockade were launched before WikiLeaks could even begin examining the files. Because CISPA words the definition of 'cyber threat intelligence' to include 'theft or misappropriation of private or government information' and 'intellectual property,' that's precisely what's at stake here.
After all, who wouldn't want a government minder as a personal bodyguard during travels abroad? By placing the NSA on guard for corporate network security, big tech firms like AT&T, Verizon, IBM, Facebook and Google won't be as hard-pressed by market forces - like rival companies and, yes, even hackers - to innovate their security technologies, leaving the heaviest lifting, and spending, up to Big Brother instead. (Source)
There is no doubt that the apparatus of CISPA is already in effect and it's merely going to be justified through legislation. The Supreme Court refuses to address privacy issues and has effectively shut down all lawsuits aimed at holding accountable those engaging in domestic warrantless wiretapping. And there are many private companies ready to offer their assistance to help track everyone's digital movements and communications.
Increasing coverage of social media was brought to the U.S. government in 2010 by war criminal Raytheon's RIOT search technology which has been called a "Google for spies." Covert eavesdropping of VoIP services like Skype has been introduced by the private sector (including Microsoft) through patents filed as far back as 2007. And massive, largely unknown data mining companies like Axciom which began in 1969 now collects and analyzes 50 trillion data transactions per year.
So CISPA passing or Obama's executive order in the name of cybersecurity is of little practical consequence other than legalizing past privacy violations and offensive state-sponsored cyber attacks by the U.S. government. It won't even make the government's cybersecurity actions transparent, but it certainly will make it transparent that a whole new level of the Internet Security Industrial Complex is taking shape.
House Of Rothschild Hoarding Gold In Face Of Coming Collapse?
January 28, 2013
Source: Jurriaan Maessen, Explosive Reports
A recent appointment of Rothschild as "financial advisor" by the Board of Directors of gold exploration company Spanish Mountain Gold is yet another unmistakable indication that the ancient family is moving the world's gold supply to both "emerging markets" and Central Banks worldwide, strengthening the family's monopoly position when the fiat-based house of cards comes crashing down in the West.
The Board of Directors of the British Columbia based gold exploration companyappointed Rothschild to "review strategic options with the objective of maximizing shareholder value." In July of 2012, Spanish Mountain Gold's CEO Brian Groves boasted already that the excavation in British Colombia is a project worth "several million ounces in gold" and is backed by "an enormous network of connections globally", Groves told Resource Clips.
Indeed, this recent appointment of Rothschild's financial expertise (from centuries worth of experience) has increased the value of this company somewhat, propelling the gold-producing company into newer heights (or depths), depending on what end of the gold bar you find yourself. It also is a sure sign that the family is tightening its grip on gold, in both the excavation, the producing and the trading phase.
In the beginning of this century there were signs that Rothschild was starting to pull back from gold. With the announcement of Lord Jacob Rothschild that his "investment vehicle" RIT Capital Partners "has ridden the rally in gold prices but will now incrementally sell down" many observers were led to believe the ancient house was abandoning the precious stuff. Jacob Rothschild stated in 2011:
"There is I believe a growing awareness of the dangerous position which confronts many countries, particularly those in the developed world. In spite of these concerns, we continue to take advantage of areas that we believe are attractive, but we will remain cautious in terms of the quantum of capital that we allocate".
Already in 2004 Rothschild blew the horn, announcing with a loud voice (that tends to carry far and wide throughout the world's financial community) that the family was withdrawing from its gold-based assets. In April of 2004 theTelegraph reported:
"The investment bank that has chaired the London meetings setting the world gold price since 1919 is quitting the market."
In 2011, an analysis makes clear how and why Rothschild manipulates the price of gold downward:
Despite these earlier indications that Rothschild was backing away from its gold assets (which smell like the calculated diversion techniques of an experienced illusionist), the recent appointment in the Spanish Mountain project is a clear sign that gold is still foremost on the mind of the family, as it has been for many centuries past. These earlier manoeuvrings by Rothschild seem to suggest a consciously constructed effort to bring down the price of gold- with the aim of buying large quantities later on, when the price was especially low. The reason for such a move is explained by Jeff Thomas in February 2012, when he wrote:
"Many economists project that, following the crashes of the Euro and the dollar, a return to gold-backed currencies would appear as a world trend. This is only natural, as the fiat currency concept would have been shown to be the farce that it is."
For this reason, Thomas argued, the hoarding of gold is being done with the aim of redistributing it later on to those nations (or supra-nations, such as the EU and China) the elite have destined to be the future global engines after the old one has been discarded:
"It is entirely possible that all currencies could receive a shake-up, and an entire worldwide system of gold-backed currencies may develop. If this were to occur, the countries that held the largest amounts of gold at that time would be out in front economically."
This indeed seems to be the case. As Edmond de Rothschild's France-based asset management company analyzes for 2013, the so called "emerging markets" are increasingly scooping great chunks of gold from the world's supply:
"It is (...) reassuring to see that physical demand has started the year well with an increase in Chinese and Indian buying. The Chinese are buying before the Lunar New Year while Indians seem to be anticipating higher duties on imported gold. At the same time, central bank buying continues. They bought 536 tonnes in 2012 (+17% on record 2011 levels) or 13% of total demand."
Another document issued by Edmond de Rothschild's "Goldsphere"-enterprise analyzes the global gold-trade, the buyers, the sellers, the winners and the losers. In one of its assessments the global elite recognizes that European nations are reluctant to sell their gold stocks and the current trend is a continuous rover of gold towards the East:
"European countries are in no rush to sell their bullion reserves as they are small in value compared to their debt problems and some of the gold might already have been pledged in collateralised loans."
While all the major strongholds of the elite are being abandoned in the US, new lairs are being set up in China. The document concludes by saying that gold-producing companies and miners are not sufficiently riding the wave of ever-rising gold prices:
"All the recent meetings we have had with gold companies tend to confirm the industry's acceptance that gold mines and gold projects have to be better managed so as to get shareholder returns more in line with the current strong gold price. And some projects have in fact already been postponed or cancelled because of insufficient profitability."
This puts the recent "appointment" of Rothschild by Spanish Mountain Gold somewhat into perspective doesn't it? It seems the ancient House of Rothschild has feigned a retreat from gold in the beginning of this century, only to then snatch it again at a good prize and move it into the East- their future global engine. When Baron Benjamin de Rothschild was asked by Israeli newspaperHaaretz what the family's intentions are in regards to China, he answered unhesitatingly "to increase our focus in that region".
As the elite's engine of control is incrementally deconstructed in the West, the world's gold is gradually moving towards its new engine in the East.
The Fed's Plan B: "We're Going to Kill the Dollar"
January 23, 2013
By Mike Whitney, Information Clearing House
"How do you solve a problem when you're running a 10% fiscal budget deficit? You are not going to get growth without private sector credit demand. The government's idea right now is that we're going to export our way out of this, and when I asked a senior member of the Obama administration last week how are we going to grow exports if we will not allow nominal wage deflation? He said, "We're going to kill the dollar." Kyle Bass interview.
Last week, amid growing rumors of a global currency war, the Fed's balance sheet broke the $3 trillion-mark for the first time in history. According to blogger Sober Look: "For the first time since this program was launched (QE) it is starting to have a material impact on bank reserves ... which spiked last week. 2013 will look quite different from last year. The monetary base will be expanded dramatically as long as the current securities purchases program is in place. ‘Money printing" is in now full swing.'" ("Fed's balance sheet grows above $3 trillion, finally impacting the monetary base", Sober Look)
Take a minute and consider the implications of the Fed's money printing operations in relation to the above quote by market analyst Kyle Bass. Can you see what's happening?
The Fed is acting exactly as one would expect it to act given it's stated intention to increase inflation (currency debasement) while intensifying the class war at the same time.
How is the Fed waging class war, you ask?
Fed chairman Bernanke has been a big supporter of deficit reduction, which is code for slashing public spending. The recent "fiscal cliff" settlement raises taxes immediately on working people by ending the payroll tax holiday. As Bloomberg notes: "Everybody took a two percentage-point pay cut." This is bound to impact consumer spending and confidence which dropped sharply last week. Here's more from Bloomberg:
"Payroll taxes went up. As part of its budget agreement on Jan. 1, Congress agreed to let the tax, used to pay for Social Security benefits, return to its 2010 level of 6.2 percent from 4.2 percent. That reduces the paycheck by about $83 a month for someone who earns $50,000." (Bloomberg)
So all the worker bees (you and me) have less money to spend, which means that there's going to be less activity, higher unemployment and slower growth. This is what all the liberal economists have been warning about for over 3 years, that is, if the government withdraws its fiscal support for the economy by reducing the budget deficits too soon, the economy will slip back into recession.
So what is the Fed doing to counter this slide and to create the illusion that nutcases who preached "austerity is good" were right?
Well, the Fed is buying mortgage-backed securities, right? So the Fed is actually dabbling in fiscal policy, assuming a role that is supposed to be played by the Congress. Now, I realise that the buying of MBS doesn't precisely fit the definition of fiscal policy because the Fed doesn't collect taxes and redistribute the revenue. But it sure doesn't fit the description of monetary policy either, now does it? The Fed is not setting rates to control the flow of credit into the system. No, the Fed is buying stuff; financial assets that provide credit to loan applicants who are purchasing hard assets. That ain't monetary policy, my friend. It is fiscal policy writ large.
The Fed is currently purchasing $45 bil per month in US Treasuries to push down long-term interest rates in order to help the banks sell more mortgages so they can reduce their stockpile of distressed homes.
And, the Fed is buying $40 billion of MBS per month to help the banks clear their books of left-over MBS and to provide funding for the banks to generate new mortgages.
Also, 95% of all new mortgages are financed through Fannie and Freddie. In other words, the government is providing all the money and taking all the risk, while all the profits go to Wall Street.
Fannie and Freddie's policy is designed to help the banks
The Fed's MBS purchasing program is designed to help the banks.
The Fed's QE (UST purchases) policy is designed to help the banks.
Do you see a pattern here? It's all for the banks, which is why Marx was correct when he referred to "political economy" because the economy doesn't operate according to free market principals. It is organized in a way that best achieves the objectives of the constituency that controls the levers of political power.
Now guess which constituency controls those levels of political power presently?
If you guessed "the Wall Street banks", give yourself a pat on the back.
So, what effect is this going to have on policy?
Well, to some extent we already know the answer to that question because-as we pointed out earlier-the policy is shaped to benefit the banks. Even so, an analogy may be helpful to better grasp what's going on.
Let's say you have $5 million that you want to put into manufacturing. In fact, you have decided you want to open your own factory and produce widgets of one kind or another to sell to the public. Eventually, you whittle your options down to two choices; you will either produce a modern line of electric cars to reduce emissions and pave the way for new technologies or you will make hula hoops. So, what's it going to be?
Fortunately, for you, the Fed announces a new program that will provide $45 billion per month "indefinitely" to manufacturers who provide low interest loans to people who want to buy hula hoops.
"Yipee", you say. "I will abandon my plan to save the planet from poisonous greenhouse gases and make my fortune selling hula hoop bonds to the Fed instead."
Isn't this what's happening? None of this has anything to do with lowering unemployment, strengthening the recovery or increasing growth. It's all just a way of funneling money to powerful constituents. And one thing is certain, that if the Fed creates the demand for a product (like MBS), then someone is going to fill that demand whether it helps the broader economy or not.
But if the Fed can buy mortgage bonds, then why can't they buy infrastructure bonds? What's the difference?
The difference is that mortgage bonds boost profits for bankers, whereas infrastructure bonds merely provide jobs for people who need them. In other words, the difference is not between fiscal and monetary, but between the "haves" and the "have nots", which is the same as saying that the Fed's policies are based on class interests. And, that brings back to our original comment by Kyle Bass, who wonders how the US can grow its way out of its present predicament (big budget deficits and weak exports) without more "private sector credit demand"?
Great question. But you can see that Fed chairman Bernanke has already tipped his hand. The Fed is going to keep waving that "$45 billion per month" carrot in front of the banks until they rev-up the credit flywheel and create a new regime of toxic mortgages. (The new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's rule on "Qualified Mortgage", which requires neither a down payment nor credit scores, makes this prospect even more likely.) Bernanke is playing the role that the repo market played before the Crash of '08, that is, the Fed is promising to buy all the complex bonds (MBS) the banks produce off balance sheet to keep money flowing to the banks. It's just like the free market, except there's nothing free about it. It's all fake and Bernanke doesn't care if you know it.
$45 billion per month isn't chump change. It's enough to inflate housing prices, to employ more out-of-work construction workers, to grow the economy, and to save bank balance sheets that are deep in the red. At the same time, the Fed's ballooning balance sheet will put downward pressure on the dollar which will increase exports while lowering real-inflation adjusted wages. Like the man said, "We're going to kill the dollar."
This is the Fed's plan: Bail out the banks, transfer the banks bad bets onto its own balance sheet, hammer the greenback, slash wages (via inflation), boost exports, and pump as much money as possible into the unproductive, overbuilt black hole we call the US housing market.
Of course, President Obama could avoid all this nonsense and just launch a government-funded jobs program that would snap the economy out of its coma, increase demand, and turbo-charge GDP, but that would be way too easy. And probably bad for profits, too.
Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at email@example.com.
DHS Says Gun Owners Are Terrorists
January 17, 2013
Following Obama's choreographed attack on the Second Amendment earlier this week, the Department of Homeland Security announced it will join the administration, the Justice Department and the FBI in a renewed attack on firearms.
Under the guise of preventing what is largely unpreventable short of disarming the entire country - eliminating "active shooter" situations - DHS boss Janet Napolitano announced on Wednesday she will work to "identify measures that could be taken to reduce the risk of mass casualty shootings," in other words, disarming law-abiding gun owners.
The Department of Homeland Security is basically an interior ministry ostensibly created in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001. Although its stated goal is to prepare for, prevent, and respond to domestic emergencies, particularly terrorism, it has, since its creation in October of 2001, pursued its real and unstated objective - acting as an internal political police force tasked with undermining and attacking enemies of the ruling elite.
DHS: Global Elite's Secret Political Police
The DHS is not dedicated to preventing "future mass casualty shootings," as Napolitano recently stated, but is assigned the critical task of attacking political enemies considered a threat to the globalist status quo. From lurid fictional claims about "rightwing extremists" to shepherding a national effort to undermine and destroy an idealistic Occupy movement, the DHS has repeatedly demonstrated that it is a political secret police.
The "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" document leaked to the alternative media in 2009 set the stage for demonizing gun owners and Second Amendment advocates in addition to a panoply of other political groups derisively tagged as "rightwing extremist" by the government.
The Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) also produced a document in 2009 warning about the danger of a purported "Modern Militia Movement," including the likes of Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin. MIAC and fusion centers around the country coordinated with the DHS to "collect, evaluate, analyze, and disseminate information and intelligence" on the supposed threat of libertarians and constitutionalists, including Second Amendment advocates. Between 2004 and 2007, the DHS provided $254 million to fusion centers engaged in surveilling Americans considered a terrorist threat by the government.
Earlier this year, the DHS released a report, "Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970 to 2008," that employed the phrase "extreme right-wing, ethno-nationalist/separatist" to describe individuals and groups it claims pose a domestic terrorist threat.
Conflating liberty issues with racism is a deliberate attempt to further demonize Americans opposed to the policies of the federal government. Designating opposition as racist is a well-tread path taken by the corporate media and Democrats, particularly since the election of Obama.
According to the latest DHS report, "the new ‘terrorists' in this country are the Americans who love liberty, hate unconstitutional government edicts and fear the bureaucrats running Washington, D.C.," writes Pat Shannan. "Second Amendment advocates are at the top of this ‘terrorist' list, but a mere ‘pro-life' bumper sticker might be enough to make one suspect in the eyes of a dumbed-down cop who forgot his oath."
Pentagon Joins Effort to Target Pro-Second Amendment Movement
More recently, the government enlisted a West Point think tank to produce propaganda detailing the so-called "far right" and warn about white supremacists teaming up with the "anti-federalist movement" to attack political enemies, the government and most notably the police.
The West Point report specifically targets the patriot movement and constitutionalists opposed to a federal government controlled by an international financial oligarchy. These violence-prone terrorists, the report states,
espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals' civil and constitutional rights. Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government. Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against the federal government and its proxies in law enforcement. (Emphasis added.)
The last sentence in the above underscores the purpose of the report generated by the United States Military academy - demonizing libertarians, constitutionalists, and specifically advocates of the Second Amendment as violent terrorists who pose a direct threat to law enforcement. The effort is designed to radicalize the elite's front line - police and first responders - and set them against the "far right."
Establishment Media's Orchestrated Propaganda Campaign
The establishment media's concerted campaign against the Second Amendment has delivered a relentless barrage of polarizing and divisive propaganda in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre in December.
CBS Chief Washington Correspondent and anchor of Face the Nation, Bob Schieffer, demonstrated the absurd lengths the establishment will go to trash the Constitution and sow fear and dissension of firearm ownership.
Following Obama's speech earlier this week, Schieffer said dismantling the Second Amendment may present a formidable task, but one less daunting than passing civil rights legislation or defeating Nazi Germany in World War II.
Producing a relentless wave of skewed surveys and op-eds in favor of "gun control" and "gun safety" (the latest misleading euphemism) reveals the urgency of the effort to disarm America and render it helpless.
Conclusion: Law-abiding Gun Owners Are the Target, Not al-Qaeda Terrorists
It is now obvious what is going on in the wake of Sandy Hook - the establishment is finally pulling out the last remaining stops in its long envisioned disarmament of the American people in accord with its ultimate plan to usher in a one-world government and financial system. A well-armed and educated populace prevents the global elite from realizing this objective.
In order to realize this required disarmament, supporters and defenders of not only the Second Amendment but the Constitution at large must be branded as renegade terrorists who threaten police. The cynical propaganda effort to pose law enforcement against a growing liberty movement is key to the elite's effort to impose an authoritarian police state on America, a plan that will not be successful if the American people are allowed to possess firearms more potent than 22 caliber bolt-action rifles.
Gun Confiscation Bill Introduced in Congress
IRS credit to citizens who allow government to confiscate their firearms
January 17, 2013
On January 13, 2013, H.R. 226 was introduced in the House of Representatives by Connecticut Democrat Rep. Rosa DeLauro. The bill will amend the 1986 IRS code and allow a credit if taxpayers "surrender" their guns to the government.
Cited as the "Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act," the proposed legislation represents another effort to convince citizens that they must voluntarily turn in their guns as a civic duty and to do their part to reduce "gun violence" and protect children, as Obama said yesterday.
The bill is yet more evidence that federal and state governments are now pulling out all stops short of door-to-door confiscation in their coordinated effort to disarm the American people.
Strikingly honest language included in the legislation specifies that the bill is part of the government's "program to reduce the number of privately owned weapons," in short, a program to disarm the American people.
The bill contains an exhaustive list of so-called "assault weapons" that will garner a $2,000 tax credit, including the much demonized Bushmaster AR-15 allegedly used in the Newtown Sandy Hook massacre.
The bill was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means on January 14, 2013.
The inclusion of the IRS in the government's attempt to grab guns is especially foreboding considering its effort to act as a Obamacare compliance enforcer. In July, we reported on a revelation made by Texas Republican Rep. Kevin Brady that the tax agency planned to hire up to 16,500 new agents.
American taxpayers must reject such cynical enticements and stand together and support the Second Amendment against all attacks by Obama and Congress.
The latest foray against the Second Amendment and the founding principles of the republic commenced soon after the Sandy Hook incident on December 15 when California Democrat senator Dianne Feinstein exploited the tragedy to call for an attack on America's "gun culture."
"I hope and trust that in the next session of Congress there will be sustained and thoughtful debate about America's gun culture and our responsibility to prevent more loss of life," Feinstein said. "I will do another assault weapons ban."
New York governor Andrew Cuomo jumped on the anti-Second Amendment bandwagon a few days later, on December 21, and proposed gun confiscation in the state. "Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option," Cuomo said. He was egged on by notorious gun-grabber advocate and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg who also demanded Obama use unconstitutional executive actions against the Second Amendment.
On December 30, Feinstein said America needs to "bite the bullet" and restrict the gun rights of Americans following comments by president Obama that he would support draconian legislation aimed at the Second Amendment.
Over the next two weeks, the establishment media launched an intense anti-Second Amendment campaign and produced corporate polls in favor of "common sense" gun bans. Alex Jones appeared on the Piers Morgan Show and a flurry of pro and con pundits and commentators debated the finer points of stripping Americans of their right to own firearms.
On December 16, Obama and Joe Biden went on national television accompanied by a gaggle of children and pushed the federal government's anti-Second Amendment agenda. Obama brazenly signed a number of unconstitutional executive actions during the performance instructing the government to roll back the Second Amendment.
NY State Senator: Gun Bill Passed In Middle Of Night Turns Law-abiding Citizens Into Criminals."
"Members were forced to vote on a bill they had not read"
Jan 15, 2013
A New York State Senator has lambasted the passing of what is being called the nation's toughest gun control bill, saying that it was introduced during the middle of the night, and that members were forced to vote on the legislation when they had not even had a chance to read it.
"I simply cannot support a bill that turns law abiding citizens into criminals by creating an entire new category of illegal firearms out of currently legal rifles and shotguns," said Senator Greg Ball in a statement.
"...the last minute push, in the middle of the night without critical public input from sportsmen and taxpayers was outrageous and forced members to vote on a bill they had not read." Ball noted.
The Senator stated that he believed the bill does nothing to address the issue of mental illness, and gave specific examples of cases within his district, which he urged that the legislation would not help to improve in any way.
"We haven't saved any lives tonight, except one: the political life of a governor who wants to be president," the Senator said on the Senate floor, in reference to Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Ball added that he believed the NY Senate was willing to transform law-abiding citizens into criminals "hoping on the front pages that we will be seen as preventing tragedies."
"Good night, I voted no and I only wish I could have done it twice." Ball concluded.
Watch Ball's comments below:
Senator John J. Bonacic, who also opposed the legislation, called it "nothing more than window dressing designed to make people feel secure until the next tragedy strikes - all while criminalizing the actions of otherwise law abiding citizens."
In prepared comments, Bonacic noted " In reading the summary of the legislation provided (my comments below are based on how the legislation has been explained, because the print of the bill has not been shown to Legislators as I write this - 8 PM on January 14), it appears law abiding citizens would become criminals - eligible to be sent to jail, simply by failing to tell the government they own guns they lawfully purchased."
"Equally problematic is the provision in the legislation prohibiting more than seven rounds in a ten round magazine - something irrelevant to a criminal." Bonacic also stated.
"Under the legislation, magazines people now own, which are capable of holding ten rounds (bullets) continue to be legal, but a person may only load seven rounds in them. It strains credibility to believe a criminal bent on a massacre is going to load only seven bullets in a ten round magazine. Law abiding citizens, on the other hand, who erroneously load too many bullets in a magazine, would be criminals under the legislation." the Senator concluded.
The bill was debated in closed door meetings, and if adopted by the New York State Assembly it will see enforced limits on magazines, mandatory license renewal for gun owners every five years, stiffer penalties for bringing guns on school property or using a gun to commit a crime and further restrictions on guns that have been termed "assault weapons".
"Under current state law, assault weapons are defined by having two ‘military rifle' features spelled out in the law. The proposal would reduce that to one feature and include the popular pistol grip," CBS reports.
Private sales of assault weapons to someone other than an immediate family member would be subject to a background check through a dealer. Also, Internet sales of assault weapons would be banned, and failing to safely store a weapon could be subject to a misdemeanor charge.
Ammunition magazines would be restricted to seven bullets, from the current 10, and current owners of higher-capacity magazines would have a year to sell them out of state. An owner caught at home with eight or more bullets in a magazine could face a misdemeanor charge.
Other provisions would see therapists required to report to the State perceived threats of gun violence by "mental health" patients. Those patients could then have their guns confiscated under the law.
Cuomo told reporters, without providing specifics, that the reason the legislation was being pushed through quickly was to avoid a potential run on sales of such weapons.
When the votes were tallied last night, the bill was overwhelmingly approved 43-18.
Senator Patty Ritchie another of the 18 to vote no on the bill, stated "...attempts to restrict legal ownership and possession of firearms from responsible sportsmen - rather than focusing on criminals - will not enhance the safety of our communities, and deprives law-abiding citizens of an important right under the Constitution of the United States."
Senator James L. Seward added "For the first time, New York will be registering rifles and confiscating private property. We will do background checks on the simple purchase of a box of .22 ammo for squirrel hunting or target practice. Someone who puts eight cartridges in his magazine instead of seven will be a felon. Sadly, these extreme, harsh measures won't stop criminals from getting guns and using them for illegal purposes."
"These reactionary laws force new, onerous regulations on those who meticulously obey the law and infringe on Second Amendment rights... further impeding the rights of law-abiding citizens does nothing to confront gun violence." Seward added.
Saying that he believed the Constitution should be "strictly construed in a manner consistent with the intent of our nation's founding fathers," Senator Lee M. Zeldin, who also voted against the bill noted:
"In our Constitution are certain rights which provide the foundation of America's greatness. Its Second Amendment in no uncertain terms guarantees the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. Its purpose was not so much about hunting as it was for a deeper and much more important consideration of our founding fathers. The inspiration for this protection rose out of a fundamental mistrust of government."
"Our great nation was founded on the idea that all people have certain inalienable rights. Our founding fathers understood that these rights were not granted by the government and therefore, shall not be removed by it either." Zeldin stated.
The traditional three-day waiting period for a bill's adoption is being waived by the Democrat-controlled Assembly, again citing a need to rush the bill through to avoid a rush on gun purchases. The Assembly is expected to approve the bill today without hesitation, paving the way for similar gun control measures on a national scale.
The president has said he is weighing as many as 19 different gun control measures that he could take without congressional approval, via executive order
Biden Says Obama to Use "Executive Action" to Restrict Second Amendment
January 9, 2012
On Wednesday during a press conference with attorney general Eric Holder, vice president Joe Biden said president Obama is considering taking "executive action" to restrict the Second Amendment rights of the American people.
"The president is going to act," said Biden. "There are executives orders, there's executive action that can be taken. We haven't decided what that is yet. But we're compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required."
"As the president said, if you're actions result in only saving one life, they're worth taking. But I'm convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm's way if we act responsibly."
In other words, according to the Obama administration and the Justice Department, if trashing the Constitution saves one life, it is worth it.
Issuing an executive action, unlike an executive order, does not modify a law. Executive actions, a Obama administration office told NBC News in October, concern "regulation, enforcement, statements of policy... and numerous other things."
Obama, unlike his predecessors, "is not expanding executive power to meet the demands of an external crisis. Instead, he is counteracting a new pattern of partisan behavior - nonstop congressional obstruction - with a new, partisan pattern of his own," Andrew Romano and Daniel Klaidman wrote for Newsweek prior to the election.
White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer told Newsweek Obama will "work with Congress where we can - and then be willing to act where they won't."
Obama has already used executive action to instruct the ATF to conficate guns. In September, Obama's Justice Department gave the ARF authority to "seize and administratively forfeit property involved in controlled-substance abuses." In other words, the agency now has the power to seize firearms from people not convicted of a crime or even charged with a crime.
In July, as the Fast and Furious scandal unfolded, Obama's Justice Department devised new rules requiring border-state gun dealers to report large purchases of firearms made by individual buyers over short periods of time.
Obama Would Call on Military to Disarm Americans During National Emergency
Army manual provides blueprint for confiscating guns of rioters and dissidents
Paul Joseph Watson
January 2, 2013
The blueprint for how Americans would be disarmed during a declared civil emergency is contained in an Army manual that outlines a plan to confiscate firearms to prevent them falling into the hands of rioters or dissidents.
Given the imminent introduction of Senator Dianne Feinstein's draconian gun control legislation, which would instantly criminalize millions of gun owners in the United States if passed, concerns that the Obama administration could launch a massive gun confiscation effort have never been greater.
In July 2012, the process by which this could take place was made clear in a leaked US Army Military Police training manual for "Civil Disturbance Operations" (PDF) dating from 2006.
The document outlines how military assets will be used to "help local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order" in the event of mass riots, civil unrest or a declaration of martial law.
On page 20 of the manual, rules regarding the use of "deadly force" in confronting "dissidents" are made disturbingly clear with the directive that a, "Warning shot will not be fired."
"Restrictions on the sale, transfer, and possession of sensitive material such as gasoline, firearms, ammunition, and explosives will help control forces in minimizing certain forms of violence," states the document on page 40.
The issue of gun confiscation is also covered in the manual, which makes clear that every effort will be made to prevent "rioters" and "dissidents" from having access to weapons.
"A main consideration in the conduct of civil disturbance operations is to prevent liquor, drugs, weapons, and ammunition from falling into the hands of rioters. Therefore, liquor stores, drug stores, sporting good shops, pawn shops, and hardware stores are main targets for looters and must be kept under close observation by means of foot and motorized patrols. Normally, businesses of this type must be identified in advance and included in emergency plans," states the manual. (Emphasis added.)
The document also instructs soldiers to protect "control force personnel and civilian dignitaries in the disturbed area" from the violent behavior of "radical or extremist elements" by denying access to "armories, arsenals, hardware, and sporting good stores, pawnshops, and gunsmith establishments, or other places where weapons or ammunition are stored. To conserve manpower, consideration may be given to evacuating sensitive items, such as weapons from stores and storing them in a central facility."In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans Police, National Guard troops, and U.S. Marshals confiscated firearms. "Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns," New Orleans PoliceSuperintendent Eddie Compass declared as he prepared to violate the Second Amendment. The National Guard conducted warrantless house-to-house searches, targeting not just Hurricane-hit areas under the pretext of stopping violent looters, but also high and dry homes that were not even affected by the storm.
Senate Approves Indefinite Military Detention of U.S. Citizens in U.S.
December 26, 2012
Source: All Gov.
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which was used two years ago to allow the government to indefinitely detain anyone, including U.S. citizens, has been approved again by the U.S. Senate. This time, however, lawmakers had the chance to add protections for Americans accused of terrorist ties, and decided against it.
A group of Democrats and Republicans pushed for an amendment to the NDAA that would have prohibited the military from detaining American citizens on U.S. soil. But then a House-Senate conference committee led by Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) removed the provision from the bill.
Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) blasted McCain and others for stripping away the amendment.
"We had protection in this bill. We passed an amendment that specifically said if you were an American citizen or here legally in the country, you would get a trial by jury," Paul said. "It's been removed because they want the ability to hold American citizens without trial in our country. This is so fundamentally wrong and goes against everything we stand for as a country that it can't go unnoticed."
Minus the amendment, the NDAA easily cleared the Senate on a vote of 81-14. It now goes to President Barack Obama for his signature.
Internet remains unregulated after UN treaty blocked
Failure to sign agreement at ITU conference stops governments having greater powers to control phone calls and data
Friday 14 December 2012
A proposed global telecoms treaty that would give national governments control of the internet has been blocked by the US and key western and African nations. They said they are "not able to sign the agreement in its current form" at the end of a International Telecoms Union (ITU) conference in Dubai.
The proposals, coming after two weeks of complex negotiation, would have given individual governments greater powers to control international phone calls and data traffic, but were opposed as the conference had seemed to be drawing to a close late on Thursday.
The move seems to safeguard the role of the internet as an unregulated, international service that runs on top of telecoms systems free of direct interference by national governments.
The US was first to declare its opposition to the draft treaty. "It is with a heavy heart and a sense of missed opportunities that I have to announce that the United States must communicate that it is unable to sign the agreement in its current form," Terry Kramer, head of the US delegation, told the conference, after what had looked like a final draft was approved.
"The internet has given the world unimaginable economic and social benefit during these past 24 years. All without UN regulation. We candidly cannot support an ITU Treaty that is inconsistent with the multi-stakeholder model of internet governance."
The US was joined in its opposition by the UK, Canada, Costa Rica, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Kenya, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Qatar and Sweden. All said they would not sign the proposed final text, meaning that although a number of other countries will sign it, the treaty cannot be effectively implemented.
"In the end, the ITU and the conference chair, having backed themselves to the edge of a cliff, dared governments to push them off," commented Kieren McCarthy, who runs the internet consultancy dot-nxt. "They duly did."
But Access Now, a lobbying group against ITU oversight of the internet, said that "despite all of the assurances of the ITU secretariat that the WCIT wouldn't discuss internet governance, the final treaty text contains a resolution that explicitly 'instructs the [ITU] secretary-general to take the necessary steps for the ITU to play and active and constructive role in... the internet.'" It urged governments not to sign it.
The ITU is a UN organisation responsible for coordinating telecoms use around the world. The conference was meant to update international treaties which have not evolved since 1988, before the introduction of the internet.
But the conference has been the source of huge controversy because the ITU has been accused of seeking to take control of the internet, and negotiating behind closed doors. Google has mounted a vociferous campaign against conference proposals that would have meant that content providers could be charged for sending data and which would have given national governments more control of how the internet works. Instead, lobbyists have said the treaties should simply not mention the internet at all because it is a service that runs atop telecoms systems.
But a bloc led by Russia, with China and the United Arab Emirates - where the conference is being held - said the internet should be part of the treaties because it travels over telecoms networks. A Russia-driven vote late on Wednesday seemed to push to include the internet in a resolution - a move the US disagreed with.
The failure to reach accord could mean that there will be regional differences in internet efficacy. "Maybe in the future we could come to a fragmented internet," Andrey Mukhanov, of Russia's Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications, told the Reuters news agency. "That would be negative for all, and I hope our American and European colleagues come to a constructive position."
The US and Europe have indicated that they instead want private companies to drive internet standards.
McCarthy, who has published ITU planning documents that would otherwise have been kept out of sight on dot-nxt's website, criticised the conduct of the meeting: "attendees were stunned to find a conference style and approach stuck in the 1970s," he said.
Writing on the dot-nxt site, he said: "A constant stream of information was available only in downloadable Word documents; disagreement was dealt with by increasingly small, closed groups of key government officials; voting was carried out by delegates physically raising large yellow paddles, and counted by staff who walked around the room; meetings ran until the early hours of the morning, and "consensus by exhaustion" was the only fall-back position."
Attempts by the ITU to encourage the US to sign the proposed treaty by removing clauses - such as one that would give individual countries rights over website addresses - failed
War on Preppers: New Scapegoat For School Massacre
Collectivists exploit mass shooting to demonize their political adversaries
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
December 17, 2012
The finger of blame for Friday's Sandy Hook school massacre has been firmly pointed at gun owners since the very first moments after the tragedy became public, but an additional scapegoat has now been identified - preppers.
"The mother of Adam Lanza, the gunman who killed 20 children and six adults in one of America's worst ever school massacres, was a "survivalist" preparing for economic and social collapse, it has emerged," reports the London Independent.
Lanza used three of his mother's guns to carry out the shooting. Marsha Lanza underwent rigorous background checks and waiting periods before she was allowed to purchase the firearms.
It is now being implied that because Marsha Lanza was "self-reliant," had readied herself for an "economic collapse," and was proficient with firearms, that this rubbed off on her son and was a driving force behind the massacre.
The obvious inference being made is that anyone who buys storable food, owns firearms and is knowledgeable about societal and economic threats is potentially a mass murderer who needs to be watched very carefully, which is a meme that has already been making the rounds in recent months.
Because Marsha Lanza owned ten guns this means she somehow "stockpiled weapons" as part of her "paranoid" fantasies about doomsday.
It's particularly cynical that Marsha Lanza's lifestyle is being subtly blamed for the murder of 20 children given that she was the very first victim of Adam Lanza's rampage.
Yahoo 7 News reports that, "Investigators are turning towards Nancy Lanza's supposed identification as a survivalist," as one of the contributing factors towards the shooting.
The stabbing of 23 children over in China last week is also being fed into the talking point, with reports that the killer Min Yongjun was "psychologically affected" by doomsday predictions.
How long is it before the establishment begins to parrot the line that preppers are suffering from a "psychological disorder" and need to be prevented by law from owning guns?
Preppers are a prime target for the establishment because they represent the polar opposite of collectivists. With increasing numbers of Americans becoming self-sufficient, a system that draws its power from overly dependent people is naturally inclined to demonize preppers.
So-called "doomsday preppers" have come under increasing scrutiny in recent months.
In early November, 46-year-old Terry Porter became a target for undercover police in Maryland as a result of a neighbor telling cops that he had guns, had made anti-Obama statements, and was a "prepper". After cops uncovered a 20-year-old drug conviction, Porter was raided by 150 heavily armed police and arrested.
We have previously documented the fact that so-called "preppers," who given the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy should be being lauded by the authorities as a good example to other Americans, are now being treated as terrorists.
Flyers aimed at Military Surplus stores produced under the auspices of the FBI's Communities Against Terrorism project earlier this year characterized bulk buying of food - a staple of prepper behavior - as a potential terrorist activity.
Earlier this year we also reported on the case of David Sarti, who was featured in National Geographic's Doomsday Preppers show. Sarti visited his doctor complaining of chest pains, only to have the doctor later commit him to a psychiatric ward and alert authorities, before Sarti was declared "mentally defective" and put on an FBI list that stripped him of his second amendment rights
Newtown school shooting story already being changed by the media
To eliminate eyewitness reports of a second shooter
December 15, 2012
The national media is ablaze today with coverage of the tragic elementary school shooting in Newtown, CT, where 27 people have reportedly been killed, including 18 children.
As always, when violent shootings take place, honest journalists are forced to ask the question: "Does this fit the pattern of other staged shootings?"
One of the most important red flags of a staged shooting is a second gunman, indicating the shooting was coordinated and planned. There are often mind control elements at work in many of these shootings. The Aurora "Batman" shooter James Holmes, for example, was a graduate student actually working on mind control technologies funded by the U.S. government. There were also chemical mind control elements linked to Jared Lee Loughner, the shooter of Congresswomen Giffords in Arizona in 2011.
According to multiple eyewitness reports from Aurora, Colorado, including at least one caught on camera by mainstream media news reports in Colorado, James Holmes did not operate alone. There was a second shooter involved. But the media quickly eliminated any mention of a second shooter from its coverage, resorting to the typical cover story of a "lone gunman."
Today, the exact same thing is happening with the Newton, CT school shooting.
Eyewitness reports of a second shooter now being "scrubbed" from the news
As the story of this shooting was first breaking, the news was reporting a second gunman.
FoxNews reported that this second gunman was "led out of the woods by officers" and then questioned. The original source of this report was the Connecticut Post.
A local CBS affiliate was also reporting the existence of a second gunman and said "Police believe there may be a second gunman and are looking for a red or maroon van with its back window blown out..."
ABC News also originally reported, "A second gunman is apparently at large. Car-to-car searches are underway."
A local CT CBS affiliate was also reporting, "CBS News reports that a potential second shooter is in custody and that SWAT is now investigating the home of the suspect. A witness tells WFSB-TV that a second man was taken out of the woods in handcuffs wearing a black jacket and camouflage pants and telling parents on the scene, ‘I did not do it.'"
But the more recent stories being put out by the media are scrubbing any mention of a second gunman and going with the "lone gunman" explanation, which holds about as much water as the "lone gunman" explanation of the JFK assassination.
"A lone gunman killed 27 people at an elementary school here, including 18 children, in a terrifying early Friday morning shooting spree," reports USA Today. It makes no mention whatsoever of a second gunman.
NBC News is also now chiming in with the "lone gunman" version of the story, eliminating any mention of a second gunman from its coverage of the tragic event.
Another story authored by NBC News carries the title, "26 dead after lone gunman assaults Connecticut elementary school." Once again, no mention of a second gunman as reported by eyewitnesses.
When key elements of the story keeps changing, something is fishy
Journalists are trained to ask questions, and one of the questions I have right now is: Why was the second gunman suddenly dropped from media coverage after the first few hours of this story developing?
And why is there always a second gunman in these recent mass shootings that seem to be engineered to maximize emotional shock value due to the sheer horror of all the innocent deaths?
This story is continuing to develop, and we'll keep asking questions here on Natural News. Our hearts and prayers go out to the children and families impacted by this violent tragedy. Given the terrible loss of life that has taken place here, shouldn't we all seek to get to the bottom of WHY these shootings all seem to fit a common pattern of multiple mind-controlled shooters followed by an almost immediate media cover-up of the facts?
For the sake of those children who were killed today, I want to get to the bottom of this and expose the REAL story, for the purpose of stopping this violence from targeting yet more innocents in the future.
Michigan House passes bill blocking NDAA detention
December 6, 2012
Source: The Tenth Amendment Center
A bill condemning detention provisions written into the National Defense Authorization Act and blocking any state cooperation with federal agents attempting to detain people in Michigan without due process unanimously passed the Michigan House Wednesday.
HB5768 declares, "no agency of this state, no political subdivision of this state, no employee of an agency of this state or a political subdivision of this state acting in his or her official capacity, and no member of the Michigan national guard on official state duty shall aid an agency of the armed forces of the United States in any investigation, prosecution, or detention of any person pursuant to section 1021 of the national defense authorization act..."
It passed 107-0.
Bill sponsor Rep. Tom McMillin was jubilant after the vote.
"My bill opposing NDAA's indefinite detention, and taking away due process, and prohibiting the Michigan government from participating passed the House today. On to the State Senate," he said.
A large coalition of grassroots activists spanning the political spectrum, including the Tenth Amendment Center, supported the bill and lobbied for its passage.
"There has been a lot of debate about the Feinstein amendment recently passed in the U.S. Senate. Will it really protect Americans from indefinite detention? Or is the language too broad? State actions like the one taken in Michigan today protect people no matter what they come up with in D.C.," Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey said. "Even if the Feinstein amendment sticks, it still expressly claims congressional power to pass legislation to detain people on U.S. soil. It is the duty of state legislatures to interpose and stop the progress of evil. And what can be more evil than government-sanctioned kidnapping? Don't let caterwauling in D.C. distract you. Keep pressing your state lawmakers to take action."
Internet Hangs in Balance as World Governments Meet in Secret
By David Kravet
There's a lot of sky-is-falling doomsday predictions about the World Conference on International Telecommunications, which opens Monday in Dubai with some 190-plus nations discussing the global internet's future.
That's because much of the accompanying proposals from the global community have been kept under lock and key, although some of the positions of nations have been leaked and published online.
The idea behind the meetings is to update the International Telecommunications Regulations governed by the International Telecommunications Union, a United Nations agency known as the ITU, that is responsible for global communication technologies.
But the outcome of the two-week session isn't likely to make much change, as no proposal will be accepted if not agreed to by all nations. And the biggest fear - that the session will lead to net censorship - has already come to pass.
"Member States already have the right, as stated in Article 34 of the Constitution of ITU, to block any private telecommunications that appear ‘dangerous to the security of the State or contrary to its laws, to public order or to decency.' The treaty regulations cannot override the Constitution," said Hamadoun Touré, the ITU Secretary-General.
Emma Llanso, a policy attorney with the Center for Democracy & Technology, said proposals by various governments to treat internet connections like the telephone system are cause for concern regarding privacy and the unfettered, free flow of information.
But there is no "doomsday" internet kill switch scenario, she said.
"There's not going to be some kind of doomsday scenario that there's a treaty that makes the internet go dark," Llanso said. "What we're seeing is governments putting forward visions of the internet and having discussions."
The last time the International Telecommunication Regulations global treaty was considered was in 1988. But technology has changed dramatically in the past 25 years.
On the table for discussion are spectrum and technology standards to improve global interoperability and efficiency. Cybersecurity, spam and data retention are also on the table.
Brett Solomon, executive director of Access, a digital rights group, is livid that the debate will be done largely in secret, with limited input from stakeholders.
"The ITU and its member states have attempted to respond to our criticisms and other challenges about the WCIT, but they fail to address the critical flaw: It's a closed, government-controlled agency that should not be making decisions about internet policy," he said. "Such decisions necessarily require the participation of governments and the private sector and civil society."
The United States is battling plans to treat the internet like the telephone when it comes to transmission agreements. Some European and Middle Eastern members are calling for so-called termination fees, in which networks where a web session begins must pay the routing cost for the session's destination - like phone companies work with phone calls.
"That model, in general, lends itself to fewer providers, higher prices, slower take-up of internet, slower economic growth," said Terry Kramer, the head of the U.S. delegation.
Llanso said termination fees, which would obviously be paid for by consumers, also opens the door to more internet monitoring.
"You can also read it as a campaign," she said, "to make all internet communication more traceable and more trackable, invading users' privacy."
Actually, The Newest Version Of NDAA Makes It EASIER To Detain Citizens Indefinitely
Friday, 30 November 201
Houston Free Thinkers
At first glance it looked like the 2013 version National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) did more to protect Americans against indefinite detention. We and several other news organizations reported as much yesterday.
But on closer examination the new NDAA actually makes it EASIER to detain citizens indefinitely.
Here's the added clause in question:
"Nothing in the AUMF or the 2012 NDAA shall be construed to deny the availability of the writ of habeas corpus or to deny any Constitutional rights in a court ordained or established by or under Article III of the Constitution for any person who is lawfully in the United States when detained pursuant to the AUMF and who is otherwise entitled to the availability of such writ or such rights."
Yesterday we focused on the line "nothing ... shall be construed to deny ... any constitutional Rights ..."
But today we offer another interpretation from Bruce Afran, a lawyer for the group of journalists and activists suing the government over the 2012 NDAA.
Afran explained that the new provision gives U.S. citizens a right to go to civilian (i.e. Article III) court based on "any [applicable] constitutional rights," but since there are are no rules in place to exercise this right, detained U.S. citizens currently have no way to gain access to lawyers, family or the court itself once they are detained within the military.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-americans-indefinite-detention2012-11#ixzz2DkQe8qSk
Passage of Feinstein-Lee amendment underlines Constitutional right against indefinite detention
Nov 29, 2012 WASHINGTON, D.C.
This evening, the U.S. Senate voted on Amendment No. 3018 to the National Defense Authorization Act sponsored by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), and co-sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul, which protects the rights prescribed to Americans in the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution with regard to indefinite detention and the right to a trial by jury.
The amendment passed, 67-29.
Moments before the vote, Sen. Paul took to the Senate floor to again voice his support for the amendment and inspire his colleagues to do the same.
I want to congratulate my colleagues on -- even though they appear to sometimes have disdain to the trial by jury, to now appear to be supporting the right to trial by jury. And I congratulate them on their conversion. I think they're still a little bit confused on Hamdi.
Hamdi had to do with the citizen fighting overseas and nothing to do with the citizen here. I have great confidence that the Supreme Court, given a ruling on the right to trial by jury, will affirm the right to trial by jury whether they were appointed by Ronald Reagan or President Obama. So we'll have that fight on another day. I will say, though, that our oath of office says that we will defend the Constitution against enemies, foreign and domestic.
I met with cadets this week and they asked me about, 'what is the freedom we fight for?' The freedom we fight for is the Bill of Rights, it is the Constitution. If we have careless disregard for the Constitution, what are we fighting for?
I will tell you since I know this record of this debate will be widely read, that I want to make former objection to the crazy bastards standard. I don't really think that if we're going to have a crazy bastard standard that we shouldn't have a right to trial by jury, because if we're going to lock up all the crazy bastards, for goodness sakes - would you not want if you're a crazy bastard to have a right to trial by jury?
I think this is a very serious debate and should not be made frivolous. This is an ancient right that we have defended for 800 years, for goodness sakes. To say that habeas is due process is absurd. It's the beginning of due process. If you don't have a right to trial by jury, you do not have due process. You do not have a Constitution. What are you fighting against and for if you throw the Constitution out? If you throw the Sixth Amendment out? It's in the body of our Constitution. It's in the Bill of Rights. It's in every constitution in the United States. For goodness sakes, the trial by jury has been a long-standing and ancient and noble right. For goodness sakes, let's not scrap it now.
I will accept victory today. I hope we will win victory and reaffirm the right to trial by jury, but let's don't play any games with any aspect and really believe that any Supreme Court in the United States, whether appointed by a Republican or a Democrat, is going to say that an American citizen does not have a right to trial by jury.
Medical Tyranny is Here, and We Can't Say We Weren't Warned
November 29, 2012
Health care reform is a hot topic today, as it has been for much of America's history. Benjamin Rush, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, warned in 1787 that medical freedom needed to be included in the American Constitution. Without this protection, Rush warned that the medical establishment would naturally progress - as many of mankind's institutions do - into an oppressive dictatorship. His words, echoing from over 200 years ago, ring strikingly true today:
Benjamin Rush, Founding Father ."The Constitution of this Republic should make special provision for medical freedom. To restrict the art of healing to one class will constitute the Bastille of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic. ... Unless we put medical freedom into the constitution the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship and force people who wish doctors and treatment of their own choice to submit to only what the dictating outfit offers."
The spirit of managerial scientific control that drives this beast is summarized in the words of Frederick Taylor, a pioneer in "scientific management." As Taylor stated in 1907, "Too great liberty results in a large number of people going wrong who would be right if they had been forced into good habits." This spirit of quasi-altruistic scientific control begins to fade away towards the higher ranks of the system, however.
The potential for medical tyranny that Benjamin Rush perceived over 200 years ago crystallized when the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations transformed the American medical establishment in the early 20th Century. They strove to create a system of schooling to manufacture a predictable, rule following group of professionals to enforce the establishment regulations. Additionally, tax exempt foundations - through their grant making power - are able to mold the idea-sphere from which medical research emerges, or is suppressed.
The dictatorial health care model as expressed by "obamacare" is being implemented as part of a larger global program. The World Health Organization announced recently that it hopes to implement - via a U.N. resolution - "universal health coverage" across the globe in fulfillment of its Millennium Development Goals. The Rockefeller Foundation is working with WHO in the project. "There is a global movement towards UHC (Universal Health Care) and it is gathering momentum," said Judith Rodin, President of the Rockefeller Foundation.
If you don't want the kind of care that the allopathic establishment prescribes, be prepared to face the consequences.
A Minnesota mother was recently brought to court over refusing chemotherapy for her 8 year old daughter. A doctor apparently reported her to CPS. She was "...ordered into court and told if they did not work with them on a treatment plan, they would lose custody of Sarah."
Another case involved a Pennsylvania mother who declined to vaccinate her child, resulting in a visit from CPS.
A 2009 case in which a 13 year old boy's parents refused chemo resulted in a judgement of "medical neglect," denying the right of his parents to refuse treatment on religious grounds.
The bottom line is this: Even if the medical establishment had our best interests at heart, what happens when their science is wrong? What happens when it is skewed in favor of the corporations that are closely aligned with them? What kind of damage is done when it is universally enforced? Benjamin Rush foresaw this danger, and it is time to face it for the reality it has become.
The Giant Currency Superstorm That Is Coming To The Shores Of America When The Dollar Dies
Nov 28, 2012
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 to62.2 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. 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 government continues 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.
10 dire consequences of Obama's re-election victory
Not that Romney would have been any better, of course
Nov 7, 2012
As of this writing, it looks like Obama has a lock on the electoral college victory, although it simultaneously appears he has lost the popular vote to Romney.
What does an Obama re-election mean for the next four years in America? Now that he's in his second and last term, of course, Obama no longer needs to restrain his actions according to popularity. He can simply unleash any desirable executive order and rule by decree, bypassing Congress as he has frequently promised to do.
This puts America in a very dangerous situation, given Obama's well-demonstrated desire to destroy freedom and liberty in America. Remember: Obama is anti health freedom, anti food freedom, anti GMO labeling, anti medical freedom and anti farm freedom. He's the one who issued an executive order claiming government ownership over all farms and farm equipment, in case you forgot that little fact.
He's also the guy who just recently issued an executive order merging Homeland Security with local corporate entities to grant the executive branch of government a power monopoly over the nation, bypassing the courts and Congress. You probably haven't even heard about that one, because he secretly signed it during Hurricane Sandy.
Given Obama's atrocious track record on freedom during his first four years in the White House, here are my top 10 predictions for the next four (if America even lasts that long before ripping itself apart):
#1) Huge expansion of TSA and the surveillance state
Watch for TSA to expand its occupation of America by setting up checkpoints on roadways, sporting events, malls and "surprise" locations. Expect to see TSA agents become even more belligerent and lawless as they ramp up their sexual molestation of innocent victims.
#2) Expansion of secret arrests of American citizens
Obama secretly signed the NDAA, legalizing the secret arrests of U.S. citizens while denying them due process. Obama also authorized secret "kill lists" that claim to authorize the U.S. government to assassinate targeted individuals.
With his re-election in place, expect Obama to start issuing a mass of "kill orders" that will even start targeting political opponents.
#3) Acceleration of national debt blowout and endless fiat currency creation
Under Obama, the national debt experienced a massive blowout where Obama added trillions of dollars to the existing debt: www.USdebtclock.org
Right now, Obama is overseeing a trillion dollars a year in additional debt - an amount that simply cannot be sustained without running smack into a financial catastrophe. It now appears that financial collapse it going to occur under Obama, not Romney.
#4) Rapid expansion of GMOs and USDA collusion
Monsanto and the biotech corporations have thrived under the Obama administration thanks to USDA collusion and scientific fraud.
Over the next four years, expect GMOs to dominate the U.S. food supply while the Obama White House rejects any effort to try to label GMOs on a national basis.
#5) Increasingly dictatorial government health care
Obamacare will grow like a cancer, pushing Americans into mandatory vaccinations that inject children with mercury, formaldehyde, MSG and aluminum.
Look for the Obama administration to wage even more wars against raw milk freedom, farm freedom and food freedom, all while requiring yet more foods to be pasteurized or fumigated under the guise of "food safety."
#6) Immediate surge in sales of guns and ammo
Obama has promised to try to destroy the Second Amendment and deny Americans the liberty to own firearms. With his re-election, expect to see a massive surge in gun sales as more people attempt to stock up in anticipation of gun bans (or government gun confiscation).
#7) Accelerated erosion of the Bill of Rights and civil liberties
Under Obama, civil rights, human rights and the Bill of Rights will be rapidly eroded. This goes hand in hand with the cancerous growth of government. As government expands its power and confiscates more economic resources, it simultaneously destroys individual liberties and due process.
This isn't to say that Romney would have been any better, of course. Both candidates were philosophically invested in the rapid expansion of Big Government.
#8) Continued destruction and looting of the U.S. economy
Under Obama, the financial looting of the U.S. economy by the global bankster elite will continue. The same would have been true with Romney, by the way.
Under Obama, America's unemployment rate will continue to head skyward, entitlements will be expanded, and the USA will be plunged into a tyrannical welfare state dominated by mindless zombies who have no cognitive grasp of reality.
#9) A "giant sucking sound" of employers leaving America
Ross Perot was right! That "giant sucking sound" is the sound of employers leaving America in droves, hiring offshore workers instead of creating jobs in the USA. And why? Because employers can't afford to pay Obamacare mandates and still stay competitive in the global marketplace.
#10) Stepped-up attacks on veterans and preppers
Returning U.S. veterans will continue to be vilified by the Obama administration, to the point where even more veterans will be arrested as "terrorists" for engaging in fundamental preparedness strategies such as storing food, water, medicine and ammo.
Watch for the liberal media to join the White House in painting veterans as "dangerous" individuals needing psychiatric medications. Never mind the fact that the media owes preppers a huge apology in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy.
There's A Huge Plan In The Works To Give The UN Control Of The Internet
Rob Lever, Agence France Presse
Oct. 29, 2012,
It is expected to be the mother of all cyber diplomatic battles.
When delegates gather in Dubai in December for an obscure UN agency meeting, fighting is expected to be intense over proposals to rewrite global telecom rules to effectively give the United Nations control over the Internet.
Russia, China and other countries back a move to place the Internet under the authority of the International Telecommunications Union, a UN agency that sets technical standards for global phone calls.
U.S. officials say placing the Internet under U.N. control would undermine the freewheeling nature of cyberspace, which promotes open commerce and free expression, and could give a green light for some countries to crack down on dissidents.
Observers say a number of authoritarian states will back the move, and that the major Western nations will oppose it, meaning the developing world could make a difference.
"The most likely outcome is a tie, and if that happens there won't be any dramatic changes, although that could change if the developing countries make a big push," said James Lewis, director of the Technology and Public Policy Program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
"But there is a lot of discontent with how the Internet is governed and the US will have to deal with that at some point."
Lewis said there was still an overwhelming perception that the US owns and manages the Internet. Opponents have a "powerful argument" to create a global authority to manage the Internet, Lewis said, but "we need to find some way to accommodate national laws in a way that doesn't sacrifice human rights."
Terry Kramer, the special US envoy for the talks, has expressed Washington's position opposing proposals by Russia, China and others to expand the ITU's authority to regulate the Internet.
"The Internet has grown precisely because it has not been micro-managed or owned by any government or multinational organization," Kramer told a recent forum.
"There is no Internet central office. Its openness and decentralization are its strengths."
The head of the ITU, Hamadoun Toure, said his agency has "the depth of experience that comes from being the world's longest established intergovernmental organization."
Toure wrote in the British newspaper The Guardian that any change in regulation should "express the common will of ITU's major stakeholders" and "find win-win solutions that will act as a positive catalyst."
But Harold Feld of the US-based non-government group Public Knowledge said any new rules could have devastating consequences.
"These proposals, from the Russian Federation and several Arab states, would for the first time explicitly embrace the concept that governments have a right to control online communications and disrupt Internet access services," Feld said on a blog post.
"This would reverse the trend of the last few years increasingly finding that such actions violate fundamental human rights."
Paul Rohmeyer, who follows cybersecurity at the Stevens Institute of Technology, pointed to a "sense of anxiety" about the meeting in part because of a lack of transparency.
He said it was unclear why the ITU is being considered for a role in the Internet.
"The ITU historically has been a standards-setting body and its roots are in the telecom industry. I'm not familiar with anything they've done that's had an impact on the Internet today," Rohmeyer told AFP.
And the analyst noted that the significance of extending "governance" of the Internet to the ITU remains unclear.
Some observers point out that the ITU hired a Russian security firm to investigate the Flame virus, which sparked concerns about the dangers in cyberspace and the need for better cybersecurity cooperation.
Rohmeyer said it was unclear whether a conspiracy was at hand, but that "the suggestion that the Internet is a dangerous place could be used to justify greater controls."
Observers are also troubled by a proposal by European telecom operators seeking to shift the cost of communication from the receiving party to the sender. This could mean huge costs for US Internet giants like Facebook and Google.
"This would create a new revenue stream for corrupt, autocratic regimes and raise the cost of accessing international websites and information on the Internet," said Eli Dourado of George Mason University.
Milton Mueller, a professor of information studies at Syracuse University who specializes in Internet governance, said most of the concerns are being blown out of proportion.
Mueller said the ITU "already recognizes the sovereign right of nations to restrict communications into and out of the country."
"What gets lost in the confusion over content regulation is that the real motive of most of the reactionary governments is to protect themselves from economic competition caused by telecom liberalization and deregulation, of which the Internet is only one part," he said.
Engineered Storm? HAARP Monitoring Project Records Strongest Readings Ever Directed In Path of Hurricane Sandy
By Alex Thomas
October 27, 2012
An independent website that has a real-time sensor network from over 28 sensors placed in rural areas across the United States has recorded the strongest HAARP readings in the projects history.
The readings, in and around the New England area, are literally off the charts and lend credence to other claims that Hurricane Sandy is possibly being engineered to cause massive destruction.
Screen shot of the readings taken by HaarpStatus.com
In a Facebook post, the HAARP monitoring website posted this startling description above the photo of the readings:
Strongest readings in the history of this project have peaked. A never before seen white-shade indicates that a value higher than 10 on the
1-10 scale has been indicated. It has no color assigned!
HaarpStatus has finally come to a bullseye over what looks like Rhode Island and Connecticut.
Current projections at NOAA say Hurricane Sandy will hit New Jersey. Our status numbers disagree. The storm is being steered toward the higher concentration numbers.
Truly remarkable numbers and it is one to archive because this may never be seen again in a very long time.
A post on theWeatherSpace.com also reported on the readings from HAARP Status and confirmed that these readings have, until now, been unheard of.
The article noted that while the National Weather Service is claiming that the hurricane is set to hit New Jersey, HAARP Status is predicting landfall in New England. (which is where the off the chart HAARP patterns has been recorded.)
"I've never seen it that white before," said TheWeatherSpace.com Senior Meteorologist Kevin Martin.
"They indicate the white means higher than their values can hold so whatever it is is a bad signals."
Regardless of where the hurricane actually hits, these readings seem to indicate that some sort of engineering of the storm has taken place whether or not it was to push the storm into the country or away from it remains up to the reader to decide.
Interestingly, this remarkable info comes as many in the alternative media have speculated whether or not Sandy was being engineered in order to somehow disrupt the elections.
The fact that this storm could very well knock out power throughout the east coast, therefore completely and totally disrupting the election as a way to somehow keep Obama in power, is detailed meticulously.
This is a very important point when you consider that we now apparently have off the chart HAARP readings throughout the east coast.
The obvious hope is that the storm will decrease in strength as it moves closer to the United States and this may very well happen but the fact remains that weather modification is a 100% real, declassified FACT and ignoring its possibility would be outright
U.N. calls for 'anti-terror' Internet surveillance
United Nations report calls for Internet surveillance, saying lack of "internationally agreed framework for retention of data" is a problem, as are open Wi-Fi networks in airports, cafes, and libraries.
by Declan McCullagh
October 22, 2012
The United Nations is calling for more surveillance of Internet users, saying it would help to investigate and prosecute terrorists.
A 148-page report (PDF) released today titled "The Use of the Internet for Terrorist Purposes" warns that terrorists are using social networks and other sharing sites including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Dropbox, to spread "propaganda."
"Potential terrorists use advanced communications technology often involving the Internet to reach a worldwide audience with relative anonymity and at a low cost," said Yury Fedotov, executive director of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
The report, released at a conference in Vienna convened by UNODC, concludes that "one of the major problems confronting all law enforcement agencies is the lack of an internationally agreed framework for retention of data held by ISPs." Europe, but not the U.S. or most other nations, has enacted a mandatory data-retention law.
That echoes the U.S. Department of Justice's lobbying efforts aimed at convincing Congress to require Internet service providers to keep track of their customers -- in case police want to review those logs in the future. Privacy groups mounted a campaign earlier this year against the legislation, which has already been approved by a House committee.
The report, however, indicates it would be desirable for certain Web sites -- such as instant-messaging services and VoIP providers like Skype -- to keep records of "communication over the Internet such as chat room postings." That goes beyond what the proposed U.S. legislation, which targets only broadband and wireless providers, would cover.
Other excerpts from the UN report address:
Open Wi-Fi networks: "Requiring registration for the use of Wi-Fi networks or cybercafes could provide an important data source for criminal investigations... There is some doubt about the utility of targeting such measures at Internet cafes only when other forms of public Internet access (e.g. airports, libraries and public Wi-Fi hotspots) offer criminals (including terrorists) the same access opportunities and are unregulated."
Cell phone tracking: "Location data is also important when used by law enforcement to exclude suspects from crime scenes and to verify alibis."
Terror video games: "Video footage of violent acts of terrorism or video games developed by terrorist organizations that simulate acts of terrorism and encourage the user to engage in role-play, by acting the part of a virtual terrorist."
Paying companies for surveillance: "It is therefore desirable that Governments provide a clear legal basis for the obligations placed on private sector parties, including... how the cost of providing such capabilities is to be met."
Today's U.N. report was produced in collaboration with the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, which counts the World Bank, Interpol, the World Health Organization, and the International Monetary Fund as members.
George Soros, Rothschilds, AFRICOM and Liberia's Gold
October 16, 2012
Source: All Africa
Report gathered by this paper has revealed that Liberian President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf's interest in hosting in Liberia a base for the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) appears to have had more to do with protecting the George Soros and Rothschild mining operations in West Africa than in championing stability and human rights.
George Soros is a Hungarian-American business magnate, investor, philosopher and philanthropist. The 82- year-old is the chairman of Soros Fund Management, and also the chairman of the Open Society Institute.
HE IS THE NEW YORK HEDGE FUND MANAGER AND ONE OF THE MOS
Since the mid-1980s in particular, he has used his immense influence to help reconfigure the political landscapes of several countries around the world-in some cases playing a key role in toppling regimes that had held the reins of government for years, even decades. Vis à vis the United States, a strong case can be made for the claim that Soros today affects American politics and culture more profoundly than any other living person.
The report, which was published online nearly a year now, indicates that for the sole purpose of protecting the George Soros and Rothschild mining operations in West Africa, President Johnson-Sirleaf and her friend Leymah Gbowee received two Nobel gold medals to help the Rothschild/Soros team control all the gold metal," adding, "A little gold for all the gold."
The report divulges that: "As with so many international constructs that started out with good intentions, the Norwegian Nobel Committee, like the International Olympic Committee, has become contrivances for global corporations," adding that: "It is now clear that the decision by the Nobel committee to award the Nobel Peace Prize to two Liberian women, along with a female Yemeni human rights campaigner, was to engage in a bit of influence-peddling in mineral resource-rich West Africa while also attempting to recognize the "Arab Spring" democracy movement."
The report avers that, While the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Yemeni human rights activist seems appropriate, considering the work she has done to oust Yemen's brutal dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh from power, the awarding of the Peace Prize gold medals to Liberian President Johnson-Sirleaf and Liberian human rights activist Leymah Gbowee, just before the Liberian presidential election in 2011, appears to be a blatant act of trying to influence the outcome of the election and rewarding the Liberian leader for her support for the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM).
"In addition to being Africa's first elected female head of state, the report adds, "Sirleaf also has the distinction of being the only African head of state to offer AFRICOM a base of operations and headquarters in Africa - Liberia."
According to the report, "Sirleaf's invitation to AFRICOM was unsettling to many Liberians who are cognizant of Liberia's past as a colony founded by freed slaves from the United States and run for decades by a series of American-Liberian dictators who acted as virtual proxies for Washington and the Firestone Rubber Corporation."
The report maintains that President Johnson-Sirleaf was implicated in supporting Liberia's brutal dictator, Charles Taylor, in a report issued in 2009 by the Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), but she rejected the TRC report and also reneged on her promise to serve only one term as president.
Winston Tubman, the nephew of Liberia's long-serving President William Tubman and who ran against then candidate Johnson-Sirleaf, the report indicates, "questioned the timing of the Nobel Committee's awarding of the peace prize to his opponent, only a few days before the October 11 election," adding that "It is also noteworthy that after the announcement of this year's Nobel awards, Gbowee, the other Liberian peace prize awardee, endorsed Sirleaf's re-election."
"Sirleaf, a Harvard graduate, has long been a darling of George Soros's "human rights" and "civil society" contrivances, including the Open Society Institute and Foundation," says the report. The report states that: "On September 9, 2008, WMR reported: "Soros is a close friend of Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a former Vice President of Equator Bank in Washington, DC. Equator was later bought by HSBC, which, not surprisingly is a financial partner of Soros."
"Soros has much more of an interest in Liberia and surrounding countries - including Ivory Coast, which saw French troops fight troops loyal to ousted president Laurent Gbagbo to install a Rothschild/Soros-run World Bank veteran, Alassane Ouattara and his French Zionist wife, into power - than promoting "civil society," the report adds.
The report unveils that: "Liberia is a nexus for gold mining and Soros's senior partner, Nathaniel Rothschild, is, according to WMR's sources, buying up all the world's gold mines in anticipation of the collapse of several world currencies, including the euro and the dollar."
"Rothschild and Soros, through Rothschild-controlled Newmont Mining Corporation, along with other Rothschild-controlled companies like Vallar and Glencore, are currently moving in to buy up gold mining companies and mining operations in Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, the United States, Peru, Ghana, Guinea, Canada, Namibia, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Ivory Coast, Mexico, Sierra Leone, and Liberia," the report among others stated.
When the 2nd Vice Presidential Press Secretary of President Johnson-Sirleaf, Mr. Christopher Sele was Monday 8 October 2012 contacted via cell phone for the Liberian leader's reaction to the report, an unidentified individual believed to be a staff member of the office of the Presidential Press Secretary, answered the call and stated that he [Mr. Sele] was upstairs, but promised that Mr. Sele would immediately return the call. However, neither did the unidentified staff nor Mr. Sele return the call up to press time.
Everything is rigged - health, politics, finance and more - but here's how to beat the system
Oct 11, 2012
I've been pondering this topic for weeks, trying to find the words to communicate the full impact of this realization to which we are all increasingly awakening. Everything is rigged... the stock market, the news, the food, your taxes, public schools, the health care system, and on and on. Even Lance Armstrong's cycling victories were all apparently rigged (with doping), we're now finding out.
But what do I mean by "rigged" specifically? All these systems and industries are rigged to cheat you, to suppress you, and ultimately to suppress your human potential.
Think about it. The sick-care system is intentionally engineered to give you cancer, keep you sick, and keep you locked into a medical system that enriches powerful corporations while sacrificing human life.
The financial system is rigged to quietly steal the value of your money through endless monetary creation also known as "quantitative easing." The more money the Fed prints, the less valuable the money you worked so hard to earn is left remaining.
The political system is utterly rigged to give you the illusion of choice while parading in front of you two puppets of different skin colors who both serve the same masters (the banksters).
The food system is rigged with GMOs that actually poison you while spreading genetic pollution across farms and fields everywhere.
The news is utterly and comprehensively rigged, and this was highlighted yet again by former CNN star reporter Amber Lyon who just went public with scathing accusations about how CNN allowed foreign terror regimes to actually BUY positive coverage on CNN's broadcasts! This story is absolutely astonishing, and the very best interview of Amber Lyon exposing all this was conducted by Alex Jones and is found on YouTube.com. (Must-see video.) See Amber Lyon's website at: http://www.amberlyonlive.com
The justice system is ridiculously rigged. A woman was arrested a few weeks ago and charged with a felony crime for drawing on the sidewalk with chalk. Meanwhile, absolute evil-minded criminals like Jon Corzine and Eric Holder go free with no prosecution whatsoever. The criminals run free while the innocent are persecuted.
"Science" is largely rigged. Science journals are all dominated by Big Pharma advertising money, and nearly all the so-called science you see in the news anymore is just a regurgitation of fabricated research from corporate science whores who have sold their integrity for a paycheck. Much of the effort behind "science" today is spent reinforcing a monopoly over medicine by pushing deadly vaccines while disparaging healing plants and nutrients.
Government regulators are completely rigged. The FDA looks out primarily for the interests of Monsanto and drug companies, not the safety of the American people. The USDA is completely beholden to the biotech industry and the meat factory giants, routinely betraying Americans with its decisions.
Private property is rigged. Thanks to unconstitutional property taxes, you never really "own" your land. Instead, you lease it from the government. Don't believe me? Try not paying property taxes and see what happens. Your property will soon be seized at gunpoint and taken over by the government.
Even WAR is completely rigged. Wars are started with false flag attacks engineered by the imperialist USA, then all the reporting on war is completely censored to shield the American public from the truth of how horrifying it really is. The entire experience of war is sanitized, processed, homogenized... just like the processed cow's milk you're (hopefully not) drinking.
How do you beat a rigged system? Don't play!
With all these systems rigged against you, how do you stand a chance of getting ahead? As every Vegas gambler knows deep down, the only way to beat the house is to not play against the house. Don't play their game, in other words.
Instead of sending your children to government-run indoctrination centers known as public schools, home school them.
Instead of watching cable news propaganda, turn off the TV and get your news from independent online media like Natural News or one of our fan sites such as Natural News tracker.
Instead of being victimized by toxic GMO food, buy organic and avoid the GMOs.
Instead of falling for vaccines and prescription drugs, say NO to vaccines and dangerous drugs. Turn to nutrition and superfoods instead!
Instead of putting all your savings and investments in the fiat currency known as the dollar, diversify your holdings into precious metals, non-U.S. currencies, farm land and other stores of real value.
Instead of voting for the next presidential puppet, simply don't vote for any president! The mere act of voting for a presidential candidate legitimizes the corrupt system. (Yes, it's definitely important to vote for local candidates and ballot measures like Proposition 37 in California.)
The point of all this is that you can't beat a rigged system. That's why it's rigged, of course: to make sure you never come out on top. So stop playing in the rigged system! The house always wins, didn't you know? That's how casinos make money, and it's how nearly everything else works, too.
Levels of awakening
The path to true freedom begins with recognizing just how completely all the systems are rigged against you. Only from there can you withdraw your consent from all the rigged systems that are insidiously working to keep you sick, suppressed, impoverished and ignorant.
From there, focus your power and your effort inward, asking self-empowering questions like how can I become better informed and educated? How can I gain new skills? How can I improve my health and set myself free from the medical enslavement system? In time, these questions will transform to more broad questions such as: How can I contribute something meaningful to the world? What can I do to serve in the defense of life and truth?
These are levels of awareness / awakening. I describe them like this:
Level 0 - "Zombie"
This is the default level of total ignorance at which 90% of the population operates. They have no clue about anything that matters such as how fiat currency systems operate, natural cures for cancer, the true dangers of vaccines, how television manipulates their behavior and so on. (These people are often experts in sports and TV sitcoms, however.)
Level 1 - "Awakened"
This level is achieved when a person realizes something along the lines of "Hey, I'm living in a dream world. I'm being told lies at every turn. What is real? How can I know what is real?" This is where people start asking questions.
Level 2 - "Informed"
A level 2 person is someone who has taught themselves a significant amount of real history and the way the world really works. This person will have knowledge of politics, psychology, world history, economics, natural health, the natural world (water, ecosystems, soils, etc.), basic anatomy, basic science and so on. Not even 1% of the population today qualifies as level 2. Most people operate in a state of wild ignorance of the world around them.
Level 3 - "Mastery"
A level 3 person not only understands a great deal about the real world around them, they have also grasped ways to navigate through that world with great accomplishment and influence. They are innovators, creators and often communicators. Financial achievement is not the purpose here. Rather, it is achieving relevance in a world largely populated by utterly irrelevant people.
Level 4 - "Enlightenment"
This level is only achieved by those of the highest dedication to spiritual awakening. You would typically only find this level of understanding in people who pursue a lifetime practice of prayer, or transcendental meditation, or a similar spiritual practice. At this level of awareness, individuals become withdrawn from the material world and really have no interest in interacting with individuals of lower levels of awareness. Far less than one in a million human beings will ever achieve level 4 "Enlightenment."
Just to review these levels again, here are some of the keywords and concepts that typically relate to people of each level:
Level 0 - "Zombie" - Football, sports scores, TV sitcoms, processed junk food, vaccinations, playing the lotto, following doctors' orders, submitting to apparent authority, going along with the status quo.
Level 1 - "Awakened" - Asks questions. Reads ingredients on foods. Questions their doctor. Watches documentaries instead of sports. Attempts to assess information and think rationally. Questions false authority.
Level 2 - "Informed" - Reads books. Explores alternative information. Invests in self-education. Participates in activism. Seeks to make changes in the world around them. Speaks out with friends. Challenges people's beliefs. Reflects on their own beliefs and is capable of adaptation.
Level 3 - "Mastery" - Has great influence. Creates things. Innovates. Provides solutions. Invents new things. No television. No vaccines. No junk food. Has a very long-term perspective. Understands the "big picture." Seeks to help others. Has compassion for living things. Recognizes the web of life on our planet.
Level 4 - "Enlightenment" - Realizes the great illusion of life. Embraces immortality of consciousness and the human spirit. Expresses compassion for others but not intervention. Never seeks to "change" others, only to invite them to expand their awareness. Recognizes interconnectedness of all life systems. Sees the human life experience in a humorous light. Is able to tap into higher consciousness. Rarely seeks fame and not interested in financial success. Often abandons all material wealth.
Remember: The rigged systems in place today want to suppress your rise from Level 0 to Level 4. They wish to keep you as dumbed-down as possible so that you never become fully aware of what's really happening around you. Only by refusing to participate in those systems do you have a real opportunity to move up the levels and achieve the only thing that really matters: High-level consciousness.
If you'd like to learn more on this subject, check out my related website www.DivinityNow.com
Leading World Bank Demographer: Vaccination Campaigns Part Of Population Reduction Policy
October 5, 2012
By Jurriaan Maessen
On October 2nd a retired demographer at the World Bank admitted that vaccination campaigns are an integral part of the World Bank's population policies. John F. May, the Bank's leading demographer from 1992 to 2012, told the French web journal Sens Public (and in turn transcribed by the think-tank May works for) that vaccination campaigns, especially in so-called "high-fertility countries", are means to achieve population reduction in those countries. May:
"The means used to implement population policies are "policy levers" or targeted actions such as vaccination campaigns or family planning to change certain key variables."
Defining "population policy" as "a set of interventions implemented by government officials to better manage demographic variables and to try to attune population changes (number, structure by age and breakdown) to the country's development aspirations", May continues to explain that the World Bank is taking up the lead role in achieving general population reduction.
It is not the first time that World Bank officials boast about their willingness to implement strict population control policies in the Third World. In its 1984 World Development Report, the World Bank suggests using "sterilization vans" and "camps" to facilitate its sterilization policies for the third world. The report also threatens nations who are slow in implementing the bank's population policies with "drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom.":
"Population policy has a long lead time; other development policies must adapt in the meantime. Inaction today forecloses options tomorrow, in overall development strategy and in future population policy. Worst of all, inaction today could mean that more drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom, will seem necessary tomorrow to slow population growth.", the report states.
Some of those steps are now being taken.
A study published in Human and Experimental Toxicology in May of 2011 concluded that "nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates." (page 8).
After an in-depth study into the effects of vaccine-coverage in relation to mortality rates among infants, the authors Neil Z. Miller and Gary S. Goldman came to this disturbing conclusion and advised that "a closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs, is essential."- but naively concluded that "All nations-rich and poor, advanced and developing-have an obligation to determine whether their immunization schedules are achieving their desired goals."
The authors cannot be expected to know that, actually, that the desired goals are exactly being achieved. Their final point is significant in this regard, that they obviously were not working on the notion that vaccines were harmful and obviously drew their final conclusions on the basis of the idea that the increase in high mortality rates among infants were unintended. The opposite is the case. The World Health Organization, the World Bank, The UN environmental department, the UN Population Fund, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and all the other arms of the creature we call the scientific dictatorship are closing in on all of humanity with mass-scale vaccination programmes and genetically engineered food.
Where the mantra used to be "to combat global warming, we need a one world government", now it sounds something along the lines of "when we wish to eradicate poverty, we must have a global government and reduce human numbers, by the way." Any pretext will do. More recently it were oceans in need that prompted the World Bank to initiate a global "alliance". The same argument can of course be applied and is being applied to every other possible calamity.
Following this line of reasoning will inevitably bring you to pretexts under which global population control can be sold. Want to reduce victims of drunk driving? Reduce human numbers. Looking to cure cancer? Reduce the birthrate so less people will die as a result of it. The scientific community has joined the effort, attempting to sell population reduction to stop poverty and disease worldwide.
Under the guidance of Ban Ki-moon's top advisor, Dr. Jeffrey Sachs, several studies have been published which call for mass population reduction in the name of poverty-reduction. In 2009 Sachs and his protégé's Pejman Rohani and Matthew H. Bonds wrote the paper Poverty trap formed by the ecology of infectious diseases. They write that the "poverty trap may (...) be broken by improving health conditions of the population."
The question that arises, of course, is how to improve "health conditions". In another study from 2009 Bonds and Rohani say:
""(...) the birth of a child in the poorest parts of the world represents not only a new infection opportunity for a disease, but also an increase in the probability of infection for the rest of the susceptible host population. Thus, epidemiological theory predicts that a reduction in the birth rate can significantly lower the prevalence of childhood diseases."
Earlier that same year, Bonds wrote a dissertation entitled Sociality, Sterility, and Poverty; Host-Pathogen Coevolution, with Implications for Human Ecology. The study concludes that the best way to eradicate poverty and disease is to, well... eradicate humans.
"We find that, after accounting for an income effect, reducing fertility may result in significantly lower disease prevalence over the long (economic) term than would a standard S-I-R epidemiological model predict, and might even be an effective strategy for eradicating some infectious diseases. Such a solution would make Malthus proud", Bonds writes.
"(...) the new model, which accounts for an economic effect, predicts that a reduction in fertility may be significantly more effective than a vaccine. It also illustrates that a sustained vaccination policy would be more likely to eradicate a disease if done in conjunction with decreased reproduction."
"This model", Bond continues, "is likely to understate the true benefits of reduced fertility because the effect of reducing the birth rate is to reduce the flow of susceptible for all diseases, which is the equivalent of a vaccine for all infectious diseases at the same time."
If you eradicate the human, you eradicate the disease- problem solved:
"Infectious diseases, however, continue to be most significant in developing countries, which experience relatively rapid population growth. The effect of this influx of children on the persistence and dynamics of childhood diseases, as well as on the critical vaccination coverage, is reasonably well-established (McLean and Anderson, 1988a; Broutin et al., 2005). But it is now warranted to turn this framework on its head: can fertility reduction be an integral element of a disease eradication campaign?"
The answer to that question is given by Bill Gates in 2010 when he promoted using vaccines to lower the population by 10 to 15%:
Disease and poverty, intertwined as they are, can therefore be eliminated by mas-scale fertility reduction. The religion of the scientific dictatorship in a nutshell.
It wasn't the first time that Mr. Sachs called for global coordination in regards to population control. In a September 2009 UN press release, Sachs not only lamented human activity on the planet, but argued for scientists and engineers to take the steering-wheel in this process:
"We're in the age of this planet where human activity dominates the earth's processes. Humanity has become so large in absolute number and in economic activity that we have overtaken earth processes in vital ways to the point of changing the climate, the hydrologic cycle," he told the UN Conference on Trade and Development."
"We don't necessarily need diplomats around the table", Sachs continued. "We need engineers around the table, scientists around the table. We need to put the cards down and have a new kind of process."
What kind of model does Sachs envision for his usurping utopia? He stated in an Economist publication in 2000:
"The model to emulate is the Rockefeller Foundation, the pre-eminent development institution of the 20th century, which showed what grant aid targeted on knowledge could accomplish."
I don't have to remind readers that it was the Rockefeller Foundation that funded and developed vaccines designed to reduce your fertility, and intended to distribute these vaccines on a mass-scale.
In his commentary The Specter of Malthus Returns, Sachs gives an adequate description of Agenda 21 without actually mentioning the UN plan for wealth redistribution and global population reduction:
"We will need to rethink modern diets and urban design to achieve healthier lifestyles that also reduce consumption. And to stabilize the global population at around eight billion, we will have to help Africa and other regions in speeding their demographic transition. We are definitely not yet on such a trajectory. We will need new policies to push markets down that path and to promote technological advances in resource saving. We will need a new politics to recognize the importance of a sustainable growth strategy and global cooperation to achieve it."
As Paul Joseph Watson reported in his September 2010 article Global Tax Scam Shifts From Climate Change to Poverty, the pretexts under which the ongoing effort to establish a world government is moving forward is undergoing a transformation. The focus has now drifted away from the thoroughly debunked global warming myth to poverty-reduction. As usually is the case, once the pretext is sold to the unsuspecting, the eugenicists move in to "reduce fertility." Global government, in other words, to facilitate global scientific
Central Bankers Inflate Fiat While Plans for One World Currency Are
October 2, 2012
According to Deutsche Bank analysts Daniel Brebner and Xiao Fu, gold is "not really a commodity at all." Berbner and Fu explain: "While it is included in the commodities basket it is in fact a medium of exchange and one that is officially recognized (if not publically used as such). We see gold as an officially recognized form of money for one primary reason: it is widely held by most of the world's larger central banks as a component of reserves."
Gold is deemed "good money" and fiat currency is represented as "bad money" because the central banking cartels confuse the worth of paper over precious metals to keep the populace in the dark as to currency value to claim a monopoly over worth and circulation as well as hoard precious metals for consumption purposes.
Berbner and Fu further elaborate that: "Fiat currencies physically have no use other than that which is prescribed to them by government and accepted by the public. That fiat currencies cost little to produce is of a secondary concern and we believe, quite irrelevant to the primary purpose."
This month, the Vatican has announced their support of a new global bank. They have endorsed the UN's endeavor toward global governance over all fiat currency - as long as they are anointed to participate in the sovereign powers of such an institution.
The Vatican believes that the Bible imbues them with "super authority" over any emerging global financial system. This may explain how they have been used as a shell bank for JPMorgan Chase and other private banking corporations as a money laundering house. These actions by the lackeys for the central banking cartels have evaded persecution and criminal retribution amid mysterious deaths such as Cardinal Paul Marcinkus in 2009 in Arizona after being involved with money laundering for international criminal syndicates.
Having the current incarnation of a global over-reaching religion that pacifies millions of people worldwide on the board of directors of a world bank that controls all fiat currency would be advantageous for the global Elite, as well as the papal bankers.
Propaganda supporting a one world currency pervades the mainstream. Paul Solman, correspondent for the PBS NewsHour purveys the positive propaganda of one world currency by asserting that: "Ah, the dream: one world, one economy, one currency - and, of course, one global political system . . . a common currency means a common economic policy . . ."
Likewise, The Institute of International Finance (IIF), a group of technocrats that represent 420 banking cartels and financing houses have joined the cry for a one world currency.
Charles Dallara, managing director of the IIF, said: "A core group of the world's leading economies need to come together and hammer out an understanding. The narrowly focused unilateral and bilateral policy actions seen in recent months - including many proposed and actual measures on trade, currency intervention and monetary policy - have contributed to worsening underlying macroeconomic imbalances. They have also led to growing protectionist pressures as countries scramble for export markets as a source of growth."
In May, The UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has issued a report that proposes that the current system of world currencies and capital rules that govern the world's economy need to be altered in order to stabilize our economic crisis.
UNCTAD wants to see the BRICs countries, known as the non-aligned nations, considered surplus nations, cut their imbalances, thereby taking the financial burden off of the UK and US as upholding the global reserve currency. A global monetary system that replaces the US dollar as the global reserve currency will accomplish this goal.
The UN proposes a complete overhaul. In the report "Adapting the International Monetary System to Face 21st Century Challenges", they call for "more intense debate on and reforms to the international monetary system imply that the current system is unable to respond appropriately and adequately to challenges that have appeared, or become more acute, in recent years. This paper focuses on four such challenges: ensuring an orderly exit from global imbalances, facilitating more complementary adjustments between surplus and deficit countries without recessionary impacts, better supporting international trade by reducing currency volatility and better providing development and climate finance. After describing them, it proposes reforms to enable the international monetary system to better respond to these challenges."
They recommend movement toward a global currency that will replace all current currencies. Revaluation will be accessed and the worth of money would redistribute with oversight of the IMF, WTO and ultimately the UN.
In April, at the BRICs summit in New Delhi, the leaders in attendance discussed how to move away from the US dollar as the global reserve currency. Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, explained: "One of the priorities of BRICs for the years to come should be the strengthening and key role of the UN's Security Council in maintaining international peace and security. And also ensuring that the UN is not used as a cover for regime change and unilateral actions to resolve conflict situations."
BRICs surmised that a "basket currency" could allow non-aligned countries to trade with each other without the fears that the central banks and their fiat currency entail. This would serve as an alternative to the US dollar and the Euro. It would empower other nations to rise up economically.
In a stance against the US dollar, BRICs countries have already begun to trade amongst themselves using approved currencies that are backed by precious metals. The IMF and World Bank are alarmed by this move and highly disapprove of it.
At the same time, China was stock piling gold to back-up their fiat currency. The purpose is to secure their country's future by converting fiat to exchangeable currency, as well as use it as a leveraging tool to assist failing nations as insurance for a favor at a later date.
Subversively, the Obama administration made investing in America easier for China. China was able to buy 35% of any auction of US Treasury bonds. This was achieved through proxy. By the intent of Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank (Fed), China may have been broken financially through inflation brought on by the Fed.
Because Bernanke values the US dollar, he knows ahead of time what he will have to pay and can set up the perfect situation to make sure he pays what he wants.
Inflation is a direct result of the actions by the Fed. They print fiat US dollars in excess of the available monies and flood the monetary system. This drives prices higher because it takes more US dollars to equal the amount of a US dollar. Currently, the US dollar is sitting at a worth of $03.8 cents.
At a Senate Budget Committee meeting in April, Bernanke used fear to coerce lawmakers on Capitol Hill. He stated: "Sustained high rates of government borrowing would both drain funds away from private investment and increase our debt to foreigners, with adverse long-run effects on US output, incomes, and standards of living. Moreover, diminishing investor confidence that deficits will be brought under control would ultimately lead to sharply rising interest rates on government debt and, potentially, to broader financial turmoil. In a vicious circle, high and rising interest rates would cause debt-service payments on the federal debt to grow even faster, resulting in further increases in the debt-to-GDP ratio and making fiscal adjustment all the more difficult."
Just this past week, Bernanke announced QE3, an indefinite purchasing of mortgage-backed securities at $40 billion per month which will devastate the US dollar's value through infinite printing of fiat and a "regressive redistribution program".
The central bankers are intentionally destroying the US dollar because out of the ashes, they have planned a global fiat that will eventually replace all fiat across the globe.
Sen. Lieberman Urges President Obama to Sign Executive Order to Take Over the Internet
September 27, 2012
By Lone Star Watchdog
It is more and more brazen everyday. The political establishment hates our free speech. They hate the fact they no longer have a monopoly on the flow of information nor control the news anymore. The internet and alternative media now dominates the information war. They are losing the Public relations battle where a good majority of the American people have lost faith in the government and now see them as a threat to our freedom and security as a nation.
Even the political elite Zbigneiw Brzezinski and Hillary Clinton stated we have lost the information war. That is because the internet has bypassed the main stream dinosaur media. The major news outlets and newspapers have been losing viewers and readers because they are seen as a propaganda arm. They are losing revenue and are on the verge of collapse because they cannot compete with the alternative media.
The former Democrat and now Independent Senator from Connecticut Joseph Lieberman who is a Israeli duel citizen wants war with Iran. Sen Lieberman is the head Chairmen of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committee wants the President to sign the Executive Order to take over the Internet. The White House has sent a five page draft out to certain members of congress. Since the Authoritarians in Congress could not get Internet bills like SOPA and CISPA passed because they kill free speech to pass the Legislation process.
The Government, the mainstream media and the Neo-Con radio has been exposed colluding together to keep people believing in a false paradigm. Rush Limbaugh has been caught having phony phone calls into his radio show to the Media staging an incidents to see an agenda is being blown wide open as a hoax. They cannot sell the war with Iran or Syria. The reason we are in a war in Iraq and Afghanistan has been discredited. The tactic of false flag attacks has been uncovered. The false left-right, Republican-Democrat and Liberal-Conservative two party system paradigm is falling apart.
Lets make taking over the internet an election loser like gun control. Touch our guns and the internet. They are out of office. The authoritarians in Washington need to be removed from power. They have shown their true colors, they hate freedom, the hate the right to keep and bear arms. The government taking over the internet show they hate our free speech the most. Freedom of speech will prevail regardless how hard they try to silence us by censoring the Internet.
Our Bill of Rights and the Internet belongs to the people, it is not the governments. Do not lose heart, we are winning to fight for freedom. This tyranny is in the final death throws of an empire collapsing. They are desperate and panicking. The internet will stay free and always be free.
LRAD Sonic Weapons To Be Deployed "Throughout" America For Crises
Devices commonly used by police to quell civil unrest, disperse protests
Paul Joseph Watson
September 27, 2012
The U.S. Air National Guard has purchased half a million dollars worth of portable LRAD acoustic systems, which are commonly used by police to quell protests and civil unrest, ensuring that the sonic weapons will be deployed "throughout" America during upcoming national emergencies and other crises.
LRAD Corporation has received an order worth $550,00 from the Air National Guard to ship LRAD 100X devices this quarter.
"With this order, LRAD systems will be in use by every major force of the Department of Defense," Tom Brown, president and CEO of LRAD told Government Security News. "The Air National Guard will be deploying the LRAD 100X systems throughout the country to support and assist civil authorities in the event of severe natural or man-made disasters. LRAD systems have proven highly effective in communicating warnings, instructions and commands over wide areas before, during, and in the aftermath of catastrophes."
As well as being powerful communication devices, LRADs emit piercing sounds that amount to nothing less than auditory torture, and serve to disperse people from geographical areas, breaking up demonstrations and other gatherings.
Larger versions of the LRAD, previously used against Somali pirates and insurgents in Afghanistan, are increasingly being deployed inside America. In 2009, the San Diego County Sheriff's Department deployed an LRAD against people going to a town hall meeting.
The largest version of the LRAD is routinely used to break up "unlawful assemblies" at protests of global summits,including at the 2009 G20 in Pittsburgh, during which an LRAD was used to terrify local residents who weren't even involved in the protest.
The LRAD 100X is weather proof, able to be heard clearly at distances of 600 meters and is 20 to 30 decibels louder than a standard bullhorn. The sound which the device is capable of emitting to disperse people is both a tool of torture and psychological warfare. Despite being described as "non-lethal," the most powerful versions of the device can kill under certain conditions.
Studies have found that the type of sound waves emitted by the sonic weapon can cause epileptic seizures, long term problems affecting brain tissue, as well as cardiovascular and central nervous system damage in humans.
As we have previously highlighted, preparations on behalf of law enforcement bodies, the federal government and branches of the military for domestic disorder have been ongoing.
The Department of Homeland Security has purchased over 1.4 billion rounds of ammunition in the last six months alone.
Last year, DHS chief Janet Napolitano directed ICE to prepare for a mass influx of immigrants into the United States, calling for the plan to deal with the "shelter" and "processing" of large numbers of people.
The U.S. Army has also been preparing for domestic disorder.
A recently leaked US Army Military Police training manual for "Civil Disturbance Operations" outlines how military assets are to be used domestically to quell riots, confiscate firearms and even kill Americans on U.S. soil during mass civil unrest.
U.S. troops are also being provided with new state of the art headgear in order to carry out "homeland security operations."
Back in 2008 the Washington Post reported how 20,000 U.S. troops returning from Iraq would be stationed inside America under Northcom for purposes of "domestic security" from September 2011 onwards.
Northcom officials were forced to subsequently issue a denial after the Army Times initially reported that the troops would be used to deal "with civil unrest and crowd control."
Watch a clip of a larger version of the LRAD dispersing protesters at the 2009 G20 in Pittsburgh, the first time the device was used inside the United States.
New Attack on 2nd Amendment: Obama Says Substance Abusers Cannot Own Firearms
September 13, 2012
The Obama Administration through the Justice Department has given the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) the authority to "seize and administratively forfeit property involved in controlled-substance abuses." In effect: those who are convicted of crimes involving alcohol and/or substance abusers will have their right to bear arms revoked.
By misuse of the civil-forfeiture doctrine, constitutional rights can be circumvented while the owner of the property will have it taken without recourse.
In 2010, the Department of Justice published that document entitled, "Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism" wherein the definition of "constitutionalist" is reworked to reflect a "generic term for members of the ‘patriot' movement. It is now often used to refer to members of the sovereign citizen or common law court movement. Sometimes the word ‘constitutionalist' is also used."
This document attempts to down play the term New World Order by explaining it as a term "used by conspiracy theorists to refer to a global conspiracy designed to implement worldwide socialism." This ideal is "targeted by right-wing extremists" as bad yet those types are afraid that "Jewish people ultimately [will] control the world."
The FBI surmises that "Sovereign citizens are anti-government extremists who believe that even though they physically reside in this country, they are separate or ‘sovereign' from the United States. As a result, they believe they don't have to answer to any government authority, including courts, taxing entities, motor vehicle departments, or law enforcement" and that these citizens are a domestic terror threat.
Last month, Brian Loftus, member of Oathkeepers, was unduly harassed for purchasing "a few boxes of ammunition."
Former US Marine Brandon Raub was indefinitely detained in a VA psychiatric hospital for speaking out against the US government on Facebook.
Raub's attorney, John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute, has stated that he is receiving correspondence from people across America that report that US veterans are being detained in psychiatric hospitals for speaking out against the US government.
Because of the Department of Homeland Security report entitled Rightwing Extremism, the US government is coming after US veterans; decrying them as domestic terrorists, extremists and white supremacists.
In July of this year, Obama vowed to "curb violence in American cities, including reasonable restrictions on gun ownership."
As a Senator, Obama supported and pushed for anti-gun legislation. He admonished Congress back then as being "slow to act" on the issues he felt were an imperative.
During the Fast and Furious scandal it was revealed that the ATF was exposed in emails to have been part of the covert operation that was designed to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3" that would require gun shops and owners to report sales of multiple gun sales to individuals.
In the speech to the National Urban League, Obama eluded to the US government defining and declaring who is mentally stable enough to have the right to gun ownership.
Psychiatric doctors have seen money in the words of Obama and are rallying to claim that supporting the 2nd Amendment is tantamount to having a mental disorder.
Some psychiatrists are asserting that there needs to be a national healthcare approach to the issue of allowing the 2nd Amendment to stand.
Propaganda studies into gun ownership claim that alcohol abuse causes the likelihood of gun-related violence to rise, according to Dr. Garen Wintemute, professor of emergency medicine at the Prevention Research Program.
Banning assault weapons would control the amount of rounds a person could shoot, while the police officers would still be allowed to tout automatic pistols. By restricting gun sales to include minor misdemeanors as well as convicted felons, 40% of gun sales would be curbed. And with the classification of gun support as a mental disorder, more control could be placed on who ultimately can own a gun.
Undercover Austin police officers aided Houston Occupy protesters
September 5, 2012
The bushy-haired, bearded protester called "Butch" didn't say much during the Occupy Austin planning sessions. Instead, he took members aside and pressed them to turn to more aggressive tactics, not a surprising strategy for a national grass-roots movement that has spawned hundreds of arrests.
It turns out that Butch, however, wasn't some wild-eyed activist intent on bringing down the top "1 percent." He was actually Austin police detective Shannon Dowell, working undercover with two other officers who had infiltrated the Austin branch of the protest movement.
"One of the things Shannon especially was doing, he would pull people aside from the general conversation and say debating isn't really the answer. We need to escalate the tactics and move to action," said Austin protester Ronnie Garza. "That's the kind of character we're dealing with."
Garza and six others now face trial on felony charges in Harris County after Houston police arrested him and 19 protesters on Dec. 12 as they tried to block an entrance to the Port of Houston during an Occupy demonstration.
State District Judge Joan Campbell lectured prosecutors during a Wednesday pretrial hearing for Garza about not disclosing the police officers' roles in the case and is now reviewing a large stack of Austin police emails delivered to her court by an Austin assistant city attorney.
Garza and the six other protesters at the December demonstration used "lock boxes," also called "dragon sleeves," to lock their arms inside tubes made of PVC pipe, a tactic designed to prevent authorities from easily removing the restraints while clearing protesters. Detective Dowell purchased and constructed the lock boxes, prosecutors now acknowledge.
'Clearly Brady material'
His role in making the devices is a key element in the case against Garza because prosecutors contend that he and other protesters were in possession of a criminal instrument during the protest, which carries a felony charge. Houston fire officials removed the lock boxes from the protesters after their arrest, using a tent to conceal the operation from the news media and protesters who were filming the event.
Campbell delayed Wednesday's hearing until Sept. 25, when she will rule on whether the undercover police files contain information favorable to Garza that prosecutors must share with the defense, as required by the 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case known as Brady vs. Maryland.
But prosecutors told the judge they had no idea the Austin Police Department evidently planted an officer in the movement, until defense attorneys subpoenaed him.
"Had we realized that an undercover officer was involved" and had participated in the construction of the dragon sleeves, "that is clearly Brady material," Harris County prosecutor Colleen Barnett said in an interview after the hearing. "Had we known that, we would have turned it over to the defense."
Chief defends officers
Attorney Glen Gladden, who represents Garza pro bono, said his office received an anonymous tip that Dowell had attended a dinner party and bragged about his undercover work with young protesters in Houston.
"I believe he is a government provocateur," Gladden said. "I didn't find out from the DA's office or the police. I found out because Dowell was bragging to the wrong people about setting these kids up, and they tipped us off. It was his big mouth that got him down here."
Austin Assistant Police Chief Sean Mannix attended the hearing and later defended his officers' conduct.
"I have no reason to believe they behaved improperly," said Mannix, who declined to comment on the mission of the undercover officers.
Campbell also expressed concern about the apparent failure of Austin police to inform the Houston Police Department about its ongoing undercover investigation before the arrests at the port. The judge questioned the safety of HPD officers and the public, citing a scenario where a bomb could have been assembled by the undercover agents and handed over to protesters.
Randall Kallinen, a longtime Houston civil rights attorney, is defending port protester Eric Marquez, who has not been able to make bail because he has a pending theft case in Dallas County.
"It's quite incredible that these Austin police officers would do this stuff, but this has been happening in other cities where agent provocateurs are shutting down protests by showing up in menacing clothing, throwing rocks and doing other disrupting tactics," Kallinen said.
Liberal verses Conservative?
There is no such thing. The left and Right paradigm is BOGUS. The Democrats are just as controlled by the New World Order as the Repubilcans are. John Kerry, a distant cousin of George W. Bush is a member of the secret society of Skull and Bones(AKA The Order of Death) along with the last three generations of Bush males (Prescott, George, and George W.) Bill Clinton, architect of the first WTC attack in 1993 as well as the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, is a member of the CFR and Bohemian Grove and is a close personal friend of George H.W. Bush. All Gore is a CFR member. Even the revered Jimmy Carter is a member of the evil Trilateral Commission and was David Rockefeller's golden boy. It was the Carter Administration that first began funding and training terrorist organizations around the world. Both parties are controlled at the top by globalist traitors dedicated to establishing a world dictatorship and enslaving humanity. They tell you that it is your duty as an American to vote. That is only a tactic to ensure your enslavement. FYI, David Rockefeller and his right hand man Zbigniew Brzezinski have a new golden boy puppet. His name is Barack Obama.
As Commander in Chief of RIOT, it is my duty to inform my readers that we do not advocate or condone violence against the government. We are peace loving people, looking for oeaceful solutions in the fight to restore the Republic of the United States. These following passeges can easily be taken to mean the opposite. However, we realize that violent resistance is what the globalists want us to engage in. They expect it. They are ready for us. A trap has been set. Don't fall into it. Do, however, be ready when they come for you
- Col. South
The New World Order Resistance Manifesto
We, the people of the world denounce your claim of ownership of the world for it is through fraud, deception and usury that you have made yourself the rulers of humankind. You have committed every evil in your goal for world hegemony and have become drunk with the blood of the innocents.
No longer shall we sit idly by allowing your agenda to stay hidden behind the veil. We shall unite with a common purpose and with a common goal to spread the knowledge of your tyranny across the globe and to demand justice until the world is free from the slavery and perdition you have created on this earth.
The Patriot's Code of Conduct
I am an American, fighting for the freedoms which guard MY country and way of life. I am prepared to give my life in defense of the fundamental principles that are outlined in the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.
I will fight without regard to rule or regulation. My enemy does not fight fair, so it is fair that I fight just the same. I will never surrender of my own free will. I will never surrender to tyranny or oppression. If I do not have the means to resist, I will never stop acquiring the means to which I may resist. In this end, I will be the best example that I can for other patriots. I will honor myself with these actions until I am free or dead.
If I am captured or oppressed, I will resist by all means, my imagination will be my only limitation. I will make every effort to escape and to aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from my enemy.
If I become a prisoner of tyranny, I will keep faith with my fellow patriots. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to other patriots. I will take command of myself and will independently back up other patriots in any way I see fit, even through temporary groupings with other patriots. At all times I will remain a free-thinking individual.
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of tyranny, I will give my name and state of citizenship. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to America's Bill of Rights or harmful to other Patriots or OUR DUTY to protect OUR republic.
I will never forget that I am an American dedicated to the principles which make my country free. I will trust in myself and hope other Patriots will return our republic with or without me.
OATH OF A FREEDOM FIGHTER
By James Stewart Kelley
Upon my sacred honor I shall fight to the death to remain free. No one shall govern me. I shall submit to no authority. There is no question in this matter. I shall always refuse to obey. I shall face my enemy squarely when he attacks. I shall counter attack when he rests.I shall press the battle and when the time comes that I face my final departure, I shall take my enemy with me, for he is a creature without mercy and he deserves none.
A Blunt warning to our Government and our Military:
In our nation of 300 million people, there are at least 95 million lawful gun owners. Those 95 million guns owners lawfully possess 212 million firearms.
Even if the government recalled ALL military members from around the entire world, they would have a force of only about two million.
95 million gun owners versus 2 million troops. I think we all know how this would turn out: the government would be slaughtered.
In fact, if only ten percent of the 95 million gun owners had guts enough to fight, we would still outnumber the military almost 3:1.
We The People of the United States aren't the least bit worried about government tanks and planes, those tools are useless in guerilla warfare. Want proof? Iraq! The U.S. government is getting its ass kicked over there. Government wouldn't last a week.
Found on a bathroom wall somewhere in the U.S.A.
You've taken over my mind. You've raped my thoughts with your image viruses then sold me fake cures for your own disease. Your words and pictures scream orders at me like angry prison wardens. When I cover my ears, your voices echo in my head. I hate you. When I see your billboards, your talk shows, your rock concerts and your factories, when I see the work of your twisted libidos, I want to kill you. I want to set fires, plant bombs, derail trains. I want to smash your buildings and tear at your bodies until the skin of my hands is worn to the bone. I am filled with a rage that burns my eyes.
I don't want to feel this way. You have done this to me. These feelings are the fruits of your multi-billion dollar sowing. And I am not alone. There are others like me out here. Every suicide, every madman, every man and woman who gets a gun and just starts shooting -- these are your illegitimate children. They don't all know what they are doing. All they know is hate for the invisible walls which you have raised around them, hate for the narrow path you have tried to make them walk. And the innocent pay in blood for your negligence.
Remember this: My mind is big. The more you try to push me down and make me small, the greater the pressure inside me becomes. The greater the pressure, the greater the chance of an explosion. There was once a time when I felt love, but now I feel only hate and anger, and fear at what I might do. And you can tell me to "BE HAPPY," but I know that you really mean "BE QUIET".
Believe me, I want to be happy. You stand in my way.
A police state exixts when federal and state political and police mechanisms:
1. Shut down media coverage after they steal an election
2.Serve the central government instead of serving the citizens.
3. Enforce the policies of the central government instead of responding primarily to criminal misdeeds
4. Spy on and intimidate citizens
ALL OF THESE CONDITIONS NOW EXIST IN THE UNITED STATES!
In a free society, police agencies respond to evidence of planned and actual criminal activity.
Police officers in a free society keep the peace: they do not investigate citizens and activities unless there is some reason to investigate.
In a free society, police do not investigate citizen's attitudes toward the central goverrnment, only their actions.
Citizen dissent is lawful in a free society and police agencies do not investigate citizen's attitudes toward the criminal justice apparatus.
THOSE CONDITIONS NO LONGER EXIST IN THE UNITED STATES!