Category Archives: News Articles

Ron Paul: Can There Be A “Right” To Gay Marriage? (VIDEO)

ron paul gay marriage

Last week the US Supreme Court ruled that all states must recognize same-sex marriage. How did they come to this decision and was it correct? Who decides?

Ron Paul: Hello everybody, and thank you for tuning in to The Liberty Report. Daniel McAdams is with me today, who is the executive director of the Institute for Peace and Prosperity. Daniel, welcome to the program.

Daniel McAdams: Thanks, Dr. Paul, it’s good to be with you.

Ron Paul: Well, what do you think is the big issue right now, did anything happen this past week, or were there several things that happened this past week?

Daniel McAdams: There was a lot that happened, we had the Obama Care decision, which you wrote about in your weekly column this week, which was big news. I think the bigger news that we were going to talk about today is the Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage. It’s interesting because back when you were in office, we did a lot of Thursday Lunches with the separation of powers. We had Lewis Fisher, who is a great expert on this, and we talked about the different branches of government. I was really interested in the way this decision was presented in the media, that the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage.

Ron Paul: The one headline that I saw was, “Same Sex Marriage: Is it right?”, and for a long time I’ve been saying this, and I might have to change my speech, but I get a good response when I talk to a crowd of people who have some bit of an understanding about rights, saying that rights do not come from our government, rights come to us in a natural or God given way. And people say yes. But here, all of a sudden, same sex marriage is a right declared not by the Congress or the supreme court, but really by one individual in the Supreme Court in a 5 to 4 ruling, and all of a sudden, this is a new right. But when people hear us talking like that, they say, “Oh, they’re against the ruling and that means they’re bigots”, and all these things that people want to pin on us. But there’s a lot more to it than just that. for instance, I think it raises the issue of licensing, what they’re really talking about is license to get married. They’re changing how you get a license, the Federal Courts are over ruling what states have done and, in many ways, they’re changing the definition of marriage, which seems to be way beyond anything that governments are supposed to do. Matter Of fact, I’m convinced that much of this maybe could have been prevented by having a lot of less laws in the land.

Daniel McAdams: Seems like both sides have it wrong; the supporters of traditional families seem to have it wrong, and the pro same-sex marriage people seem to have it wrong.

Ron Paul: Yes, because I don’t think we should be involved in it. I see marriage as a sacrament, but not everybody wants to see it as a sacrament. But why is the government involved in a sacrament and say, “Okay, we’re going to have a license for you to participate in a sacrament”. Baptism, for many in this country, is still a sacrament, but we don’t go out and get a license. The question comes up, why have we succumbed to this to accept this idea that none of us can get married. I would assume you probably have a license, I certainly had a license, it was assumed, no questions asked. But that’s not the way it’s been for a long time. Looking into this, I found out that there are many that defend the position that this came about from the civil war, it came about because racism existed, and it came out because they wanted to prevent blacks marrying whites. That particular understanding was reversed in 1967 by the Supreme Court. It isn’t so much that the court is supposed to sort this thing out. If we lived in a libertarian and free society, that would be out of the way and you would be allowed to make up your own definition: do whatever you want as long as you didn’t exert aggression against somebody else. And those who believe in traditional marriage could have their traditional marriage and get married in the church, and those who want a secular marriage can do that too. But I don’t think we’re anywhere close to that today.

Daniel McAdams: The pro-traditional marriage people say that this will ruin marriage, this will undermine marriage. We were talking before the show and you mentioned a couple of interesting statistic about so called traditional marriage. You said 57% of millennials have their children out of wedlock, more than half of the pregnancies result in abortions, and we know that well more than half of marriages end in divorce. So it seems like traditional marriages are doing a pretty good job of destroying traditional marriage.

Ron Paul: I think this is an issue, matter of fact, I have even made the case that abortion is not legalistic in that you’re going to make a moral society. You can have laws regarding it because there’s a killing going on, but it doesn’t change anything. I think the courts are very, very political, people say, “They don’t have to be political because they have life time tenures”, but they are very political even during the abortion debates. Abortions were done wholesale in the 1960s, so the courts had to catch up, and in a way the courts are sort of catching up now with this. The whole point is that they can’t change anything, you can’t change a culture by legislation, so that’s why libertarians will make the point that if there’s no violence involved, don’t try to micro-manage this. So who’s right, who has the control of the definition. In a libertarian society, nobody does, but here, I think the people who believe in traditional marriage fall short in traditional marriages when they have a chance. But they shouldn’t go to the government and tell the government, “You are going to define it my way”, even though they might have a historical argument for that. At the same time, the secular people want to march in and say, “No, that’s exclusive”, I think so often we bring on so many problems and, to tell you the truth, I don’t think this is going to end. There have been people who suggest that this is just opening up the door for more and more problems, because there is an exclusion and it’s a religious exclusion. If it’s against your religious beliefs and they sort of did this with abortion, and I saw times when you as residents were forced to be involved, but eventually they said that if you had a personal objection to it then you didn’t have to participate, and that’s what they’re saying here. But I think you’re going to have lots of problems, possibly even in the military, who knows what might happen in the military.

Daniel McAdams: The Chaplains may be forced to do it against their will.

Ron Paul: Yes, and there could be problems in college campuses, we still have some religious colleges that will talk about mandatory dorm regulations. I think this ruling was a defeat for the constitution and a defeat for liberty, because both sides are rejecting the libertarian approach, they’re just arguing who gets to do this and that, and I think it’s a victory for big government. There was a time when I’ve tried to sort out judicial review, and we might do a program some day on this. Even Jefferson and Hamilton argued about how much review should be there, and even back then some argued that the courts should not even have the right to review congressional laws. But today it is epidemic. The Supreme Court believes they can rule on anything and everything, be it state rules, regulations, or politically correct ideas. And now they’re ruling and saying, “We are the arbitrator, we will say what marriage is”. You know they gave Kennedy some credit for saying some nice words about people who are in love have a right to come together and be a unit. But if love is the thing that brings us together, the argument can be made from maybe a legalistic viewpoint, that what if 3 or 4 people are in love. Are you going to be the arbitrator of who loves who? So, therefore, there’s going to be an expansion. I think it’s going to invite a lot more problems, and it’s not going to be solved just with this.

Daniel McAdams: As you say, popular perception is that the Supreme Court is the final verdict on these things, and the media presents it that way, I think people even think that way. We’ve had several guests in the old days on the luncheons who have said that that’s an absolutely crazy thought.

Ron Paul: In principle, I’ve challenged this whole idea of getting a license for a sacrament. But I challenge the principle of licensing everything, because a license is almost always used to exclude people. I’ve already mentioned it was used initially to exclude interracial marriages, so it was an exclusion. But if you have a license to be a plumbers, and say that plumbers have to have licenses, what are you doing? You’re excluding somebody else? Why doesn’t the customer decide whether he’s a plumber or not, or let his reputation or what his promises are decide whether he’s a plumber or not. But no, if you give them a license, then you have this cab drivers. Right now, there are some challenges to the licensing of cab drivers. But there is licensing of everything, and even if I argued the case that the states should not be involved in all this licensing, now it’s federal, which makes it more complicated. I want people to get back to the point of asking how is this compared to a libertarian society. This is more complex, because it’s always government: who’s going to get control of the government? Then you get intervention in economic policy: how are we going to take care of the poor? They say, “Well, we’ll take from this group and give it to this group and we’ll fix wages”, and all these things, rather than saying, “Maybe the poor could be taken care of better if we had a free society and sound money”. This is why I’m so strongly annoyed with all this, because it assume that this is a responsibility of government, and I do not believe that is the case. This is just mischief and there’s a lot of attention towards it, and I think it’s pretty amazing that there’s a lot to be said about the need for traditional marriage. But none of this stuff is going other help traditional marriage, matter of fact, it emphasis so much that the people who believe in traditional marriages are going the wrong way. We need to clean up our act and find out what traditional marriage is all about. In the same way, with the abortion issue, there are some people who are arguing that the abortion rate is somewhat down. But I was thinking, maybe that is good, maybe education is good, but who knows what is the real reason. Divorce rates may be down because people aren’t getting married. But these kind of things should be solved in a voluntary society, and of course, this society would be more peaceful, because if you want to be part of the freedom movement, you have one very, very strict rule. And that is the rejection of the use force, personal force, or legal force, by the government to do certain things. And, of course, it means you have to be tolerant of other people’s choices, you shouldn’t be too tolerant of government’s use of force, that is what we should be intolerant of.

Anyway, I’d like to thank everybody for tuning in today to The Liberty Report, and please come back soon.

This video was published by the Ron Paul Institute.

The Transnational Corporate “Niggerization” Of America (VIDEOS)

black scholar Cornel West

On June 22 notable black scholar Cornel West remarked that President Obama’s inability to label the Charleston shooting an act of “white supremacism” effectively “Niggerized” the Commander in Chief. “I would say the first black president has become the first ‘Niggerized’ black president” West told CNN.

Why? A Niggarized black person is a person who is afraid and scared and intimidated when it comes to putting a spotlight on white supremacy and fighting against white supremacy.

As West observes, the uncanny verb “Niggerize” suggests the psychic and cultural compulsion to assume the role of slave, with all of the connotations suggested for the subjugation of individual and collective history bound up in the complexity of African American identity and experience.

West’s allegiance to “democratic socialism” prevents him from critiquing the welfare state that has decimated black families and communities since the late 1960s. One must further question West’s assertion in light of Obama’s own privileged background at elite preparatory and Ivy League institutions. Indeed, much of Obama’s experience with US segregation and racism was learned through his intellectual-political mentors, including US Communist Frank Marshall Davis and leftist agitator-terrorist Bill Ayers.

As early as 2002 West used the inflammatory “Niggerize’ term in a similarly divisive context. In an address at Harvard Law School he drew on the “blowback thesis” prevalent in progressive-left circles to assert that the United States population was forced to take the position of victim through the events of September 11, 2001, intimating the attacks sprang from decades of violence meted out by the US military around the world. The “white supremacist” response, he suggests, was characterized by “revenge, retaliation, where the big folk on the block gonna hunt you down and crush you like a cockroach.”

Setting aside the craven logic of blowback committed to by the academic and pedestrian left alike, one might further question why West, whose father was a US Department of Defense contractor and who is presently a fellow at the historically Rockefeller-funded Union Theological Seminary (where he assumed his first academic post in the 1980s) would not take the opportunity to transcend the moment and point to the broader “Niggerization” of all American people by Obama and the US Congress via the fast-tracking and inevitable ratification of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership crafted by the international corporate cartels. Indeed, it is no secret that “Obamacare” and such “free trade” deals are among the foremost goals of Obama before his departure from office.

Dr. West and President Obama Onstage

Dr. West and President Obama Onstage

The slavemaster corporate elite who control the global cartels–Soros, Gates, Buffett and their cohorts at Davos, Bilderberg and other fora–are Obama’s true overseers. So too are they the real “Niggerizers” of the world population, as evidenced in what is known thus far concerning such pending “trade agreements” and the feudalistic system their authors intend to implement.

Alongside Obamacare America’s first black president has placed every American citizen on the auction block, selling them at bargain-basement prices to the transnational corporate supremacists who will strip them of their last Constitutional protection of due process whereby they might meagerly contest the undermining of environmental and workplace rights at home and the misuse of their nation’s military abroad.

In the broader context of so-called “free markets” thoroughly ignored by West’s promotion of racial antagonism, Obama’s shameless advocacy of transnational corporate economic hegemony signals the twilight of humanity and its manifold experience of struggle for freedom and dignity.

Professor James F. Tracy is an Associate Professor of Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University. James Tracy’s work on media history, politics and culture has appeared in a wide variety of academic journals, edited volumes, and alternative news and opinion outlets. James is editor of Union for Democratic Communication’s Journal Democratic Communiqué and a contributor to Project Censored’s forthcoming publication Censored 2013: The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2011-2012. Additional writings and information are accessible at

Unprepared: What Do You Think Would Happen If A Greek-Style Crisis Hit America?


In this article, I am going to share with you some statistics that prove that most Americans are completely and totally unprepared for a Greek-style economic crisis.  According to one recent survey, an all-time high 72 percent of all Americans are concerned about an economic downturn, and yet the amount of actual preparation that is taking place for the next economic downturn is very low.  As 2008 has faded into our memories, most Americans have been lulled into a false sense of security.  Most people seem to be far more concerned about the latest exploits and scandals of their favorite celebrities than they are about the very real problems that this nation is steamrolling toward.  Hopefully what is going on in Greece right now will serve as a wake up call, because the truth is that similar things could happen in the United States much sooner than most of us would dare to imagine.

When a major financial crisis strikes, what is one of the first things that usually happens?

People start pulling their money out of the banks.

A few years ago when problems erupted in Cyprus, photos of long lines at ATMs rapidly circulated all over the Internet.  And now the same thing is happening in Greece.  The following is just one example…

tweet 4

This is why it is so important to not put all of your eggs into one basket and to always have some emergency cash at home.  Most Americans just assume that the money that they have in the banks will always be available, but that is not necessarily true.  When a major emergency erupts, you don’t want to end up like this guy

On Monday, cash machines remained closed until midday, and then opened for withdrawals of no more than 60 euros a day. “I’ve got five euros in my pocket, I thought I would try my luck here for some money. The queues in my neighbourhood were too long yesterday,” said plumber Yannis Kalaizakis, 58, outside an empty cash machine in central Athens on Monday.

Sadly, a lot of Americans don’t have any money saved up for emergencies at all, so they wouldn’t even have any reason to line up at the ATMs.  According to a survey that was just recently released, 29 percent of all Americans do not have a single penny in emergency savings.  That was the highest level that has ever been recorded.  An additional 21 percent of all Americans have less than 3 months of expenses saved up. Those are some incredibly disturbing numbers. A different study posed the following question to people…

“Do you have 3 months emergency funds to cover expenses in case of sickness, job loss, economic downturn?”

Incredibly, 60 percent of all respondents could not answer that question affirmatively.  In addition, another recent survey found that 57 percent of all Americans do not consider themselves to be ready for a “sudden financial setback”. So what will all of those people do when things start melting down? Yes, there are a few people that are trying to financially prepare for the hard times that are coming, but they represent only a small percentage of the U.S. population.  It has been estimated that less than 10 percent of all Americans own any gold or silver for investment purposes.  To me, that is an absolutely frightening number. But of course it isn’t just money that we need to be concerned about when a major crisis strikes. In many U.S. cities, even the threat of a major storm can cause people to storm the supermarkets and clear the shelves of essential supplies. So what would happen if there was actually a major national crisis? In Greece, supermarkets are doing a booming business at the moment as people feverishly stock up for the coming days.  Right now, Twitter is being flooded with pictures like this one…

tweet 3

When things get bad, food becomes an extremely high priority for most people.  During a major emergency, you won’t necessarily be able to rely on being able to go to your neighborhood store to get the things that you need.  That is why it is so alarming that 53 percent of all Americans do not have a minimum three-day supply of nonperishable food and water at home.

Just think about that.  If they were not able to resupply themselves at the stores, more than half of the country would start running out of food and water within days.

And let’s not forget about medicine either.  During a major emergency, people still need to take their daily medicines, and this is becoming a significant problem in Greece right now

Drugmakers said they would continue to ship medicines to Greece in coming weeks despite unpaid bills, but warned that supplies could soon be in jeopardy without emergency action.

So what about you?

Do you have extra medicines stored up for an emergency?

And what would you do if a family member sustained a major injury and you were not able to get to the hospital?

One survey found that 44 percent of all Americans don’t even have first-aid kits in their homes.

To say that we are woefully unprepared as a nation would be a massive understatement.

We don’t think ahead, we don’t plan, and we are exceedingly dependent on the system.  If the system fails, we are going to be in a massive amount of trouble.  Here are some more numbers that come directly from the official FEMA website

A recent Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) survey found that nearly 60 percent of American adults have not practiced what to do in a disaster by participating in a disaster drill or preparedness exercise at work, school, or home in the past year. Further, only 39 percent of respondents have developed an emergency plan and discussed it with their household. This is despite the fact that 80 percent of Americans live in counties that have been hit with a weather-related disaster since 2007, as reported by the Washington Post.

In the final analysis, a Greek-style economic crisis is not the only threat that we need to be prepared for.  In the United States, we also face the threat of natural disasters such as hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis and even volcanic eruptions.

Other potential dangers include civil unrest, terror attacks, EMP shockwaves, major pandemics and drought.

Even if you are not a “prepper“, it only makes sense to do certain common sense things to prepare yourself and your family for a major emergency.

Sadly, most Americans will not listen until it is far too late.  And then once a major crisis strikes, they will be forced to rely on the kindness of others because they have not made any preparations themselves.

Michael T. Snyder is a graduate of the McIntire School of Commerce at the University of Virginia and has a law degree and an LLM from the University of Florida Law School. He is an attorney that has worked for some of the largest and most prominent law firms in Washington D.C. and who now spends his time researching and writing and trying to wake the American people up. You can follow his work on The Economic Collapse blog, End of the American Dream and The Truth Wins. His new novel entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on

Russia Vows Continued Support For Embattled Syria

Syria's Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem (3rd L) speaks to Russia's President Vladimir Putin (2nd R) and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (3rd R) during a meeting at the Bocharov Ruchei state residence in Sochi, Russia, Nov. 26, 2014.

Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem (3rd L) speaks to Russia’s President Vladimir Putin (2nd R) and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (3rd R) during a meeting at the Bocharov Ruchei state residence in Sochi, Russia, Nov. 26, 2014.

Obama’s war is in its fourth year – using Islamic State and other takfiri terrorists as US proxies to replace Bashar al-Assad with a pro-Western puppet.

Continued conflict killed over 200,000, displaced millions more and created the world’s greatest internal and external refugee crisis.  Nothing in prospect suggests ending things diplomatically.

Putin and Sergey Lavrov met with Syrian Foreign Minister Wali al-Moualem in Moscow. They pledged continued support in fighting terrorism.

“Our policy of supporting Syria, its leadership and its people remains unchanged,” said Putin. “Syrian people will win in the final run.”

Lavrov stressed Russia will continue “all possible assistance to increase (Syria’s) ability to resist the evil” of terrorist forces battling to overthrow its government.

Al-Muallem condemned Washington for spending a billion dollars supporting terrorists operating in Syria.

“The Americans are making no secret of their support for terrorists,” he said. They demand resolving things politically while waging dirty proxy war.

Putin promised support for establishing an anti-terrorism coalition – despite regional countries including Israel, Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states allied against Damascus.

Al-Muallem said “Syria’s main problem is the support offered to terrorists that are active in our country by neighboring nations. But we are ready – based on (help offered by Russia) – to work toward cooperation in the fight against terrorism.”

They infest the region – recruited by Washington and rogue allies from scores of countries. Syria’s survival depends on defeating them. Iraq and other countries are threatened.

Washington’s aim to topple all independent governments is the greatest threat of all. Direct US intervention in Syria and elsewhere looms if proxy wars fail.

Putin confirmed Russia will keep helping Syria economically throughout its current crisis, as well as help strengthen its defense capability.

Saudi documents obtained by WikiLeaks revealed a secret Riyadh, Turkey, Qatar plot to topple Assad. Last month, AP News reported the same thing – citing Saudi Arabia and Turkey alone.

Saying both countries adopted “an aggressive new strategy to bring down Syrian President Bashar Assad…their common enemy.”

Their alliance reflects impatience with Obama’s failure to act more aggressively, said AP. It omitted explaining Obama’s war – launched in March 2011 to topple Assad, eliminate an Israeli rival, isolate Iran, and use takfiri death squads to do it.

Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar are bit players except for their willingness to supply weapons, funding and training along with US CIA and special forces involved.

The battle for Syria’s soul continues. No end of conflict looms – nor relief for millions of Syrians suffering hugely because of Washington’s imperial ruthlessness.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected]. His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”. Visit his blog site at

Understanding Pope Francis’ Encyclical On ‘Climate Change’


(The Real Agenda) By denying poor countries access to fossil fuels, or a realistic replacement to promote their development, Pope Francis is indeed condemning them to perpetual poverty.

Neither Solar, nor wind energy sources are viable substitutes due to their poor output and their vast demand for land.

Let’s start by the conclusion, and along the way understand why Pope Francis’ latest effort to attract people to the Church of Climate Change is a failure:

Pope Francis has made an enormous mistake while attempting to weigh in on the global warming/climate change debate.

His perceptions on both global warming and climate change as well as other topics that he took a shot at, such as the use of fossil fuels and their role in the appearance of “catastrophic” atmospheric events related to the emission of carbon dioxide, which incidentally is a well-known and scientifically proven life-giving gas, are proof that he did not have any scientists by his side before or during the writing of the document.

The Pope started his peregrination towards the “scientific consensus” altar on the left foot. Along with his lack of scientific understanding, which has been demonstrated on the text of the encyclical, the Pope of the people also banned news coverage of his meeting with United Nations representatives and in doing so discriminated against journalists who wished to attend. The reason for the ban was the reporters’ public skepticism about the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

The 184-page long Holy Encyclical dedicated several of its paragraphs exclusively to address the environmental concerns contained in the Pope’s mind. These paragraphs are the ones that will have the attention of this article.

Let’s take a look at the first of the Pope’s statements directly addressing climate.

The climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all. At the global level, it is a complex system linked to many of the essential conditions for human life. A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system.In recent decades this warming has been accompanied by a constant rise in the sea level and, it would appear, by an increase of extreme weather events, even if a scientifically determinable cause cannot be assigned to each particular phenomenon.

Humanity is called to recognize the need for changes of lifestyle, production and consumption, to combat this warming or at least the human causes which produce or aggravate it.

It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanic activity, variations in the earth’s orbit and axis, the solar cycle), yet a number of scientific studies show that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human activity.

Concentrated in the atmosphere, these gases do not allow the warmth of the sun’s rays reflected by the earth to be dispersed in space. The problem is aggravated by a model of development based on the intensive use of fossil fuels, which is at the heart of the worldwide energy system. Another determining factor has been an increase in changed uses of the soil, principally deforestation for agricultural purposes.

This paragraph is full of factual errors that can be easily pointed out and corrected with data from well-known international agencies whose observations and the evidence obtained during the process paint a different picture.

First, the planet is not getting warmer. According to data from the NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Earth stopped warming 18 years ago and the planet has seen a new global cooling trend for the past 10 years.

The next point where the Pope is incorrect is on the alleged rising sea levels. In this case, NOAA’s own data also refutes the Pope’s claim about significant increases in ocean levels and the supposed coming catastrophic rise due to global warming. In reality, oceans have risen na average of 8 inches per 100 years, since there is a registry.

Then, there is the Pope claim that man-made global warming causes events such as hurricanes, tornadoes, drought and heat waves to become more prevalent and intense. However, evidence and historical perspective say otherwise. As explained by James H. Rust, a retired professor of nuclear engineering, and fervent critic of the current ‘business as usual’ situation on energy policies, “suggesting carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is causing these changes is very tenuous when examining similar past events in times when carbon dioxide changes were not occurring.”

Last but not least, on the paragraph above, the Pope blames Carbon Dioxide for the current and impending heat and the general contamination of the environment. As explained by Rust, neither CO2 not any other greenhouse gas influences solar radiation because they are transparent in the wavelength spectrum. CO2 is not an environmental contaminant either as it is the main source of ‘food’ for plant life, which is what animals, plants and us humans eat. If there is one significant outcome that must be noted from the presence of large amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere is that CO2 abundance promotes better agricultural output. In sum, CO2 is a life-giving gas.

Without delay, let’s read and then analyze Pope Francis’ beliefs on what he calls a “vicious circle” regarding the carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. In the paragraph below, he references statements that have also been disproven with Science, not doctrine.

Warming has effects on the carbon cycle. It creates a vicious circle which aggravates the situation even more, affecting the availability of essential resources like drinking water, energy and agricultural production in warmer regions, and leading to the extinction of part of the planet’s biodiversity.The melting in the polar ice caps and in high altitude plains can lead to the dangerous release of methane gas, while the decomposition of frozen organic material can further increase the emission of carbon dioxide. Things are made worse by the loss of tropical forests which would otherwise help to mitigate climate change. Carbon dioxide pollution increases the acidification of the oceans and compromises the marine food chain.

If present trends continue, this century may well witness extraordinary climate change and an unprecedented destruction of ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us. A rise in the sea level, for example, can create extremely serious situations, if we consider that a quarter of the world’s population lives on the coast or nearby, and that the majority of our mega cities are situated in coastal areas.

Since most of the Pope’s assertions are linked to carbon emissions, let’s emphasize again that CO2 is not a pollutant, but a gas that serves a food source for plant life. CO2 abundance translates into more robust flora, both agricultural and wild rain forests, which he incidentally mentions as being threatened. As it has been pointed out by experts, CO2 can be considered a fertilizer which promotes more significant plant growth and with less need for water.

A direct effect of more CO2 as an available food source means having the potential for growing more food and for rain forests to grow larger. More about the positive social and economic impact of a carbon rich world can be read in a report titled “The Social Costs of Carbon? No the social benefits of Carbon, published by the American Coalition for Clean Coal electricity. The document also compares its findings to those of the report issued by the Federal Interagency Working Group.

In his struggle to attempt to produce a strong case, the Pope continues talking about climate change and what he calls its serious global implications for the poor, the group he likes to talk about a lot and who he feels an ally of in every single issue.

Climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day. Its worst impact will probably be felt by developing countries in coming decades.Many of the poor live in areas particularly affected by phenomena related to warming, and their means of subsistence are largely dependent on natural reserves and ecosystemic services such as agriculture, fishing and forestry. They have no other financial activities or resources which can enable them to adapt to climate change or to face natural disasters, and their access to social services and protection is very limited.

For example, changes in climate, to which animals and plants cannot adapt, lead them to migrate; this in turn affects the livelihood of the poor, who are then forced to leave their homes, with great uncertainty for their future and that of their children. There has been a tragic rise in the number of migrants seeking to flee from the growing poverty caused by environmental degradation. They are not recognized by international conventions as refugees; they bear the loss of the lives they have left behind, without enjoying any legal protection whatsoever.

Sadly, there is widespread indifference to such suffering, which is even now taking place throughout our world. Our lack of response to these tragedies involving our brothers and sisters points to the loss of that sense of responsibility for our fellow men and women upon which all civil society is founded.

The Pope wants people to believe that climate change represents a much more serious threat to the poor than war, which is the main reason people are constantly displaced in third world nations.

Migrants flee their land because they are being displaced by powerful military forces, as it happens with the Palestinians, with people in Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Ukraine. In this paragraph the Pope makes it clear that he does not think the poor nations should have the ability to develop as the rich countries did.

Pope Francis does not want the poor to enjoy the benefits that development provides, such as low-cost transportation, good communications, heating in cold places and cooling in warm place, which are the conditions observed in most fo the third world. As we mentioned at the beginning of this article, Pope Francis wants the poor to be poor in perpetuity.

On the issue of doing away with fossil fuels, the Pope says the following:

Many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change. However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption.There is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced, for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable energy. Worldwide there is minimal access to clean and renewable energy.

There is still a need to develop adequate storage technologies. Some countries have made considerable progress, although it is far from constituting a significant proportion. Investments have also been made in means of production and transportation which consume less energy and require fewer raw materials, as well as in methods of construction and renovating buildings which improve their energy efficiency. But these good practices are still far from widespread.

The worst part of the Pope’s encyclical is that he does not provide viable solutions, limiting his opinions to unproven statements, flawed science and non-existent alternatives. He calls for dropping fossil fuels as the main source of energy and calls for the adoption of alternative energy sources without citing those alternatives.

If we assume that he refers to solar radiation, wind and biomass as those “alternative sources”, once again, the Pope shows complete ignorance on the inability of those sources to power development throughout the third world.

In addition to not providing clear solutions, the Pope conveniently left out what is perhaps the most serious threat to the planet and to humanity itself: Geoengineering. No public discussion about environmental threats can be taken seriously if it does not address geoengineering, the manipulation of te climate via aerosol spraying over the skies.

Humanity is being showered by aluminum, cadmium and barium among other heavy metals, which are directly responsible for the death of flora and fauna and for the appearance of previously unknown disease, yet the Pope omits geoengineering from his environmental driven encyclical?

According to neurologist Russell L. Blaylock, M.D.”nanoparticles of aluminum are infinitely more reactive and can easily penetrate the brain”

My major concern is that there is evidence that they are spraying tons of nanosized aluminum compounds. It has been demonstrated in the scientific and medical literature that nanosized particles are infinitely more reactive and induce intense inflammation in a number of tissues. Of special concern is the effect of these nano particles on the brain and spinal cord, as a growing list of neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) are strongly related to exposure to environmental aluminum.

The chemicals contained in aerosol sprays are responsible for increasing incidence in cancer, Parkinson’s disease, dementia, respiratory issues, asthma, and bronchitis, among others, but those who informed Pope Francis about the imminent dangers of environmental destruction did not warn him about the disaster being caused by the global program of geoengineering that has been active since at least 1960 and how this program threatens the planet and humanity?

I am no scientist, but I have devoted the last 18 years to studying topics such as environmental destruction and I can humbly say that Pope Francis has done no good to the environment by repeating the same propaganda that comes out of the mouths of political and corporate interests. Pope Francis has lost a great opportunity to call on his followers to wake up from the long trance where most of humanity has been due to the lack of courage from people in leadership positions.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio: You have failed your faith, your church, humanity and the environment by not recognizing publicly that the official environmental agenda is a ploy to keep people in the third world living in misery for the rest of their lives and in doing so furthering the secretive depopulation agenda that the leaders of the world have carried out for decades and that the Vatican and the Catholic Church have helped to keep secret. You have chosen sides and you have chosen to side with the power-hungry elite who wants to bring about a world government to fully dominate humanity. In fact, you have called for global governance yourself in the latest encyclical.

This encyclical should be understood as irrefutable proof that the Pope, the Vatican and the Catholic Church are working against and not along humanity.

Luis R. Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others. Luis has worked as a news reporter, on-air personality for Live and Live-to-tape news programs. He has also worked as a script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news. Read more about Luis.

Paedophelia And The Brutal Cover Up – Psychopathy At Large


Hardly anything gets me more upset than the in-your-face paedophelia issue: the disgustingly obvious truth of it, the massive cover up and denial, and most of all the prosecution and abuse by authorities of the very victims of these crimes. In any other universe these people would be cared for, lovingly listened to, and protected.

Today? It’s the bizarro world of muzzle and kill the good people and let the devils run amok.

And this issue is not just paedophelia. This covers even more taboo subjects the cowardly public refuses to pursue. That’s the most outrageous and mind-bending aspect of this whole swept under the carpet issue. We’re also talking satanic ritual abuse, supposedly human creatures actually performing sexual and torturous blood sacrificial rituals on innocent children, as well as others.  Routine rape and other forms of physical abuse are merely lower level forms, yet just as horrific, of these same demonic abuses.

That this phenomenon that has gone on for centuries and continues full throttle into today’s world is something the world is apparently not prepared to accept – and therefore complicit in – is only sealing humanity’s own fate if it doesn’t wake up and decide to stand up against it.

The situation in the UK is ripe for further exposure. There are so many known creeps coming to the fore just ripe to be fully prosecuted. Valiant people have worked hard to expose this issue including David Icke and many others for years. The public is listening and it’s having a profound effect.

May many more arise to tear down the walls of cover up and deceit and lay into these bastards in the highest levels of power with everything in them!

If That’s Not Enough, Look at the Vatican

What more obvious and in your face example can you have than dirty, perverted old, and young, men disguised as “conduits to god” sexually abusing young people? It’s so common it’s become a joke.

Where’s the joke in that? Where the hell is common sense justice and stopping these perverse maniacs from preying on innocent children?

No – humanity is washed over with waves of pacifying propaganda minimizing the issue with just a dab of outrage to keep it believable. Damn. If you’re not outraged you’re not fucking paying attention!

Literally “cloaked” in garbs of deceit and presupposed authority these dirty minions from hell have been doing this for ages. And the outrage? Ask the billions of Catholics who maintain their dystopian loyalty to this cult of abuse. Where the hell are they? Transfixed in religious dogma and blind subservience.

But the Catholic Church is not only one vector of such ritual abuse. Research for yourself, the connections meet up with any and every organization or so-called religious or secret institution. Rampant abuse is at work as we speak.

It’s dark and very insane. And costing lives, often dying in abject agony. When will humanity wake the hell up?

The Ingrained Abuse System

Missing children and misplaced or supposedly dead babies and disappearing youngsters are rampant statistics yet no one questions why. Governments don’t care or it would be a center issue instead of marginalized on milk cartons, once upon a time,  and off beat news stories, if anything at all.

This is what we’re up against.

The cover up is as plain as day yet few seem to sit up and take serious notice. Hence the reference to our current dystopia, a place where up is down and right is wrong and nothing of moral value matters. We’re descending into just such a pit as we speak.

But It Doesn’t Need to be So

Real people care. They love, they have heartfelt concerns. The narrative humanity is being handed by these massive discrepancies not being addressed is simply a ploy, an old one in fact, of convincing the masses that what they think they are concerned about really isn’t a problem.

Controlling psychopaths having their way with a complicit humanity. Absolute self destructive insanity.

There’s not much more I can say on this, except the following video. If this doesn’t rip your guts open in outrage and disdain for our current fully corrupt system I don’t know what will.

Please, be a voice for truth and sanity. Make your conscious, loving and caring presence known for the sake of the suffering. Speak up and make a difference. Our future and that of our children and fellow humans is at stake.

Much love, Zen

By Zen Garder at

Empire Of Mass Illusions (VIDEOS)

James Fetzer PhD

On this week’s Real Politik we speak with Prof. Jim Fetzer about his recent termination at Veterans Today and his new volume And I Suppose We Didn’t Go to the Moon Either? The Beatles, the Holocaust, & Other Mass Illusions, co-edited with Mike Palacek and featuring chapters by Fetzer, Jim Marrs, Jay Weidner, Thomas Dalton, Zen Gardner, and several others. Fetzer is the Distinguished Knight Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at University of Minnesota Duluth.

The founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, he has authored and edited 30 books on the philosophy of science, artificial intelligence, and analyses of American political conspiracies, including the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the plane crash of Senator Paul Wellstone, and the events of September 11, 2001. Fetzer is a regular contributor at Veterans Truth Network and hosts The Real Deal at Media Broadcasting Central, with older audio files at Additional writings and information are available at


Interview Highlights

We begin the interview by discussing Prof. Fetzer’s recent departure from Veterans Today, where he had been an associate editor since 2011. Fetzer had a falling out with VT director Gordon Duff concerning the overall nature of the Jade Helm military exercises taking place in the summer of 2015. “I’d published 150 articles by about six weeks ago, around the first of May,” Fetzer notes,

when I was dismissed from Veterans Today for publishing about Jade Helm. In retrospect, I’m convinced Gordon has been using VT to manage veteran attitudes about events. He was unhappy to have another former marine, Robert O’Dowd, publish about Jade Helm. [Duff] added an editor’s note to minimize the significance of what O’Dowd was asking about Jade Helm. When I published an article a couple of days later defending O’Dowd and criticizing Duff for intervening, he added an even more caustic editor’s note. But nevertheless after the first hour it had over 600 views. It was obvious it was going to go to number one, which I even observed to my wife.

So Gordon, seeing the handwriting on the wall, took it down. He subsequently published several articles minimizing the threat of Jade Helm, suggesting it’s nothing but a routine training drill involving nothing but National Guard troops and merely 1,200, all of which is provably false. And I have published on this among others, in an article entitled, “Gordon Duff: Covering for Jade Helm and the Boston Bombing,” because I noticed immediately, when on the following day he took me out of Veterans Today, that he’d removed all four of my most recent articles about the Boston bombing, each of which blew the case apart. The entire thing is a fraud … I’ve subsequently continued to publish on my own blog and on Veterans Truth Network.

In relation to the Boston bombing the most significant article being, “THEY DIDN’T DO IT: Maret Tsarnaev Blows Apart the Boston Show Trial,” where Maret was the aunt of the two men who were accused of complicity in the event. I learned from her that even the footage of the two boys at the Marathon was fake because Tamerlan was shown clean-shaven in the footage, but he actually had a beard at the time. I asked her to substantiate it, which she did with proof after proof after proof.

Also, I point out in this same article how Tamerlan was taken into police custody. He was stripped naked and put in to a police car, widely broadcast at the time, and subsequently he is found dead and his brother is claimed to have done it. But how could his brother have done it once Tamerlan is in police custody?

Fetter explains how the idea for the new volume, And I Suppose We Didn’t Go to the Moon, Either? was largely the invention of Mike Palacek. “This came from the creative genius of Mike Palacek,” Fetter explains,

who’s published about 20 books of his own. Mike is kind of a homespun version, kind of a Will Rogers type, who represents genuine Americana. He has a way of looking at the world that is so totally down to earth, and I recommend all of his works.

He wanted to do a series. Initially he was struck by the fact that Kevin Barrett and I had this radio show called, The Dynamic Duo, which lasted a year-and-a-half on Genesis. We subsequently collaborated on many events. Today we’re The False Flag Weekly News together, which I highly recommend on No Lies Radio …

[Palacek] published a book entitled, The Dynamic Duo: White Rose Blooms in Wisconsin, named after this German group that had sought to resist imposition of fascism on Germany, which was very flattering. It turned out to be an enormous thing–the size of a phone book! When Mike proposed doing sequels about Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing, about the moon landing and even the Holocaust, and then eventually about 9/11, I was eager to do it, and to become involved as an editor. He proposed the title for the series, which is “Save the World, Resist the Empire.”

A tireless pursuer and analyst of media disinformation, one of Prof. Fetzer’s most notable recent articles is titled, “James H. Fetzer – Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia BUSTED!

Professor James F. Tracy is an Associate Professor of Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University. James Tracy’s work on media history, politics and culture has appeared in a wide variety of academic journals, edited volumes, and alternative news and opinion outlets. James is editor of Union for Democratic Communication’s Journal Democratic Communiqué and a contributor to Project Censored’s forthcoming publication Censored 2013: The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2011-2012. Additional writings and information are accessible at

Deal Reached: Wireless Remote Drug-Releasing Microchip Implants On The Assembly Line

MIT-Langer-Cima-2 michrochip implants

By: Heather Callaghan | –

A pharma company with generic drugs meets michrochip and biotech in a marriage of implantable devices that are shockingly close to the finish line of commercialization.

Deals were made. Money exchanged. Development in process – this is actually going to happen.

Is this the next phase of The Singularity? The complete bypassing of pills, injections – things that one actively chooses and takes – to a passive acceptance of remote controlled wireless chips quietly and somehow pumping substance for up to 16 years? Or is it more public relations for the long-time push for the coming ”brain chip”?

But first to roll out will probably be the wirelessly controlled birth-control implanted device backed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Rob Matheson of TechSwarm reports:

…Earlier this month, MIT spinout Microchips Biotech partnered with a pharmaceutical giant to commercialize its wirelessly controlled, implantable, microchip-based devices that store and release drugs inside the body over many years.

Invented by Microchips Biotech co-founders Michael Cima, the David H. Koch Professor of Engineering, and Robert Langer, the David H. Koch Institute Professor, the microchips consist of hundreds of pinhead-sized reservoirs, each capped with a metal membrane, that store tiny doses of therapeutics or chemicals. An electric current delivered by the device removes the membrane, releasing a single dose…


Now Microchips Biotech will begin co-developing microchips with Teva Pharmaceutical, the world’s largest producer of generic drugs, to treat specific diseases, with licensing potential for other products. Teva paid $35 million up front, with additional milestone payments as the device goes through clinical trials before it hits the shelves.

Langer was apparently inspired in the 1990s by microchip manufacturing to make a new drug delivery system. Cima, a chip-making expert had said, “…being out-of-this-world is not something that needs to stop anybody at MIT – In fact, that should be the criterion.” Cima recalls the early trial-and-error process saying, “We were trying to find the killer application. We thought, ‘I have a hammer, what’s the right nail to hit?’” Human trials for the wireless capabilities actually took place in 2011 – then Gates got involved.

The Techswarm report goes on:

Apart from providing convenience, Microchips Biotech says these microchips could also improve medication-prescription adherence — a surprisingly costly issue in the United States.

Do you hear that? Non-adherence won’t be tolerated because someone or something else will be calling the shots, so to speak… According to a supportive report by the Annals of Internal Medicine, the estimated unnecessary health costs of people who don’t stick to their meds is up to $100 billion to $289 billion annually.

Incidentally, that report goes on to say that a failure to follow prescriptions causes around 125,000 deaths annually and up to 10 percent of all hospitalizations. Is that on top of the 200,000 or so annual deaths caused by FDA-approved prescription drugs and more from the 200,000 – 400,000 annual deaths from medical mistakes at the hospital? (source)

Then we have the kicker – the first device likely to roll out:

While its first partnership is for treating chronic diseases, Microchips Biotech will continue work on its flagship product, a birth-control microchip, backed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, that releases contraceptives and can be turned on and off wirelessly.

Cima, who now serves on the Microchips Biotech board of directors with Langer, sees this hormone-releasing microchip as one of the first implantable “artificial organs” — because it acts as a gland. “A lot of the therapies are trying to chemically trick the endocrine systems,” Cima says. “We are doing that with this artificial organ we created.”

Do I really need to point out that it might not be a good idea to allow an organization that strives for depopulation to remote control women’s decision whether or not they can conceive? Listen to the proud men who would be gods – it’s been a long time dream of upper-echelon scientists to replace and “improve” the glandular system. It began with attempts to sew animal parts into human glands in the early 20th century, funded by Big Oil. Isn’t it coincidental that one of the biggest health crises facing Americans is glandular dysfunction – including infertility?

Also, is this not an all too real metaphor for alchemy? Gold alloy for “this artificial organ we created”?

In December, I wrote about “Injectable 3D Vaccines With Programmable Particles Anticipated for Future Epidemics,” along the same lines. Previously, Brandon Turbeville reported on Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation work with developing “on demand” nano vaccines using genetically engineered proteins.

So there we have it, three or so avenues with which the “new medicine order” will be rolling out devices that mesh us with nanotech, biotech and wireless tech all in one. Who needs individuality and choice when one can let someone else take the medical wheel – from some remote location…

Heather Callaghan is a natural health blogger and food freedom activist. You can see her work at and Like at Facebook.

The Most Dangerous Mountain In The United States: What Would Happen If Mt. Rainier Erupted?


Is the next major volcanic eruption in the United States just around the corner?  Mount St. Helens and the Yellowstone supervolcano get most of the attention, but many geologists are actually far more concerned about the potential danger that Mt. Rainier poses.  It has been called a “time bomb“, “the most dangerous mountain in the United States” and “one of the most dangerous volcanoes in the world” due to its proximity to major population centers.  Scientists tell us that it is a matter of if, not when, the next eruption will happen, and even a minor eruption could result in tens of thousands of Americans being literally buried alive in super-heated mud.  So what would a full-blown eruption do?  It would potentially cause death and destruction on a scale that is almost unimaginable.

On May 18th, 1980, Mount St. Helens erupted with the power of 500 Hiroshima bombs.  At the time, very few scientists anticipated that Mount St. Helens was capable of such a powerful eruption.  But Mount St. Helens is not even the most dangerous volcano in the state of Washington.  If Mount Rainier were to erupt with the same force that Mount St. Helens erupted in 1980, the loss of life would be far, far greater.  The following comes from Wikipedia

If Mt. Rainier were to erupt as powerfully as Mount St. Helens did in its May 18, 1980, eruption, the effect would be cumulatively greater, because of the far more massive amounts of glacial ice locked on the volcano compared to Mount St. Helens[33] and the vastly more heavily populated areas surrounding Rainier.[38] Lahars from Rainier pose the most risk to life and property,[39] as many communities lie atop older lahar deposits. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), about 150,000 people live on top of old lahar deposits of Rainier.[8] Not only is there much ice atop the volcano, the volcano is also slowly being weakened by hydrothermal activity. According to Geoff Clayton, a geologist with a Washington State Geology firm, RH2 Engineering, a repeat of the Osceola mudflow would destroy Enumclaw, Orting, Kent, Auburn, Puyallup, Sumner and all of Renton.[32] Such a mudflow might also reach down the Duwamish estuary and destroy parts of downtown Seattle, and cause tsunamis in Puget Sound and Lake Washington.[40] Rainier is also capable of producing pyroclastic flows and expelling lava.

Most people don’t even know what “lahars” are, but they can be exceedingly deadly.  Just imagine a tsunami of super-heated mud that is hundreds of feet thick traveling at highway speeds.  In fact, scientists believe that Mount Rainier is capable of producing massive lahars that could move at speeds of up to 50 miles per hour

Heat from an eruption will melt ice and glaciers on the mountain and turn them into mudslides moving up to 50 mph, with the potential to be more than 400 feet deep in nearby valleys. Rainier has had a history of lahars, ranging from more than 5,600 years ago to only 500 years ago.

The largest of these debris flows – the Osceola Mudflow – occurred 5,600 years ago, covered 212 square miles of land from Rainier to Kent and was hundreds of feet deep.

The cities near Mount Rainier have early warning systems, but the truth is that once a lahar is unleashed it would be necessary to evacuate hundreds of thousands of people from the region in less than an hour.  Does anyone actually believe that would be possible?  Here is how one author described the danger that residents could potentially be facing…

The numerous towns and cities that occupy the surrounding valley would all be at risk for not only severe destruction, but complete annihilation. Residents of cities like Orting, Sumner, Buckley, and Enumclaw are estimated to have no more than 30 minutes before the lahar, speeding down from the many rivers that flow from Mount Rainier, buries their homes and businesses beneath as much as 30 feet of mud and debris. Even the larger cities like Auburn, Puyallup, and Tacoma itself are not safe. Auburn and Puyallup, with nearly 80,000 residents between them, would be covered in 20 feet of mud in less than an hour, and Tacoma, at almost 200,000, is estimated to be hit with nearly 10 feet from the lahar.

It is hard to even come up with the words to describe how horrific this would be.  It would literally be a “river of death” hundreds of feet high burying everything in its path in super-heated mud.  Once a lahar is within sight, there is no possibility of outrunning it.  The only hope would be to get to high ground in time.

If Mount Rainier were to experience a full-blown eruption today, it would likely be the worst natural disaster in U.S. history up to this point by far.  And scientists tell us that such an event is inevitable

The nature of this impending and INEVITABLE tsunami is, this isn’t just water flowing, this is giant boulders, whole houses, a million huge trees, cars, ships, people, cows, we saw this in Japan recently, all smashing along relentlessly and not ending in a minute or an hour, but going on and on and on, piling into narrow bays and pinned in by high hillsides…this makes the tsunamis WORSE, not safer!

The Puget Sound bay is not that deep.  So the resulting multiple high flood events pouring into several parts of the Puget Sound will cause a huge wave to jump ahead of the flood and the bulky mess of debris pouring in will displace more water and it will flood huge areas that are at sea level and even, like in Japan, make huge waves smashing up hillsides, wiping out everything, tearing down trees, rocks and buildings.

Once this wave of destruction hits, no one will be able to save others because it will go on and on and on for several hours at least.

Those that have studied Mount Rainier tell us that there is evidence that the mountain has produced at least 60 lahars in the past.

And according to the Seattle Times, there is a “one in seven” chance that Mount Rainier will produce another one within our lifetimes…

Chances are one in seven – worse than the odds of having a house fire – that a moderate lahar will happen in a person’s lifetime.

But these are not normal times.

Mount Rainier lies along the Ring of Fire, and right now volcanoes all along the Ring of Fire are waking up.

A couple of months ago, I wrote an article entitled “The Number Of Volcanoes Erupting Right Now Is Greater Than The 20th Century’s YEARLY Average“.  Since that time, the number of volcanoes that are currently erupting around the world has grown even larger.  At this point, 41 volcanoes are currently erupting, and the vast majority of them are along the Ring of Fire.

When Mount Rainier is ready to erupt again, scientists tell us that there will probably be an increase in earthquakes in the area first.  And there have been about 20 earthquakes in the general vicinity within the past two months.

So let’s keep an eye on it.

Of course it is also possible that we could see a major eruption at Mount Rainier without any significant warning whatsoever.

In any event, a full-blown eruption of Mount Rainier would cause death and destruction on a scale that is absolutely unprecedented in modern times, and scientists assure us that such an event is in our future.

Michael T. Snyder is a graduate of the McIntire School of Commerce at the University of Virginia and has a law degree and an LLM from the University of Florida Law School. He is an attorney that has worked for some of the largest and most prominent law firms in Washington D.C. and who now spends his time researching and writing and trying to wake the American people up. You can follow his work on The Economic Collapse blog, End of the American Dream and The Truth Wins. His new novel entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on

John F. Kennedy’s Speech Sounded Like Prophecy (VIDEOS)

jfk speech

(The Real Agenda) John F. Kennedy knew, as president, that he was in a position where he could fight the system whose birth was brewing.

JFK knew it because previous presidents had spoken about that system. They had been tempted and recruited to carry out what the shadow government wanted to be a coup d’Etat that would have ended the United States sooner rather than later.

On the day JFK gave his famous anti-establishment speech, he not only warned the American people about the secret group that he referred to as the enemy of freedom, liberty and accountability, but he also declared war on that system.

Kennedy’s words were prophetic in that he described the plan of the shadow government to very significant detail and every single of those details have come true.

The group that nowadays controls the planet via their puppet governments indeed uses secrecy and deceit to conceal their actions. That secrecy and deceit worked well for them for a long time, but now, for a variety of reasons people know things are not right.

Incrementalism has been another weapon of the shadow government. Their measures of control have been applied carefully and dutyfully to raise the least suspicion possible. As it is now apparent, the mainstream corporate media has been complicit in the plan and are a great reason for the success of the globalist establishment.

Even thouh we know that JFK was right and that the powerful interests that dominate the planet are well under way to reach the pinnacle of their agenda, it is not a bad idea to listen to the magnitude of such a plan.

Below is John F. Kennedy’s warning speech; the one that should have waken up all of America, but that for some reason that many still do not understand, failed to sound the alarm in the people.

And while we are at it, let’s also hear JFK’s predecessor; Marine Corps General Smedley Butler, who in 1934 revealed details about the conspiracy to replace FDR’s government via a coup d’etat. The powers behind such a plan were “moneyed interests” he said. This plan was part of a larger attempt to install a fascists dictatorship in the United States that ended up failing.


Luis R. Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others. Luis has worked as a news reporter, on-air personality for Live and Live-to-tape news programs. He has also worked as a script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news. Read more about Luis.

Greece May Become BRICS Member


In May, Russian Deputy Finance Minister Sergey Storchak invited Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras to become the sixth BRICS member – joining Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

At the time, Tspiras said he was interested – giving Greece access to its $100 billion capitalized New Development Bank (NDB), aiming to break Western dominance and become one of the world’s leading lending institutions.

It’s headquartered in Shanghai – expected to begin operating in July, according to Russian Deputy Finance Minister Sergei Storchak. Indications are Russia and perhaps China are willing to help Greece financially. So far Greece hasn’t requested it.

Athens is holding talks with other BRICS members on possible membership. They’ll continue during a July 9 and 10 summit in Ufa, Russia.

Deputy Greek Defense Minister Costas Lsychos warned Greece would become a European “economy colony” if it accepts Troika demanded bailout terms.

He called them “unacceptable to our history, to our national pride and sovereignty.” Tsipras urged Greeks to vote no in this Sunday’s national referendum on Troika demanded bailout terms.

He indicated possible snap elections if popular sentiment accepts them. “If the nation wants poverty…we will respect the choice, but will not execute it,” he said Monday.

Troika strategy likely involves exacerbating crisis conditions, letting Greece default on its $1.8 billion IMF payment due June 30, reduce the euro’s value to benefit Eurozone exports, force new elections, replace SYRIZA with new governance amenable to its predatory terms, and/or use default as a reason to ease Greece out of the Eurozone – a so-called Grexit.

Troika officials have no interest in restructuring Greek debt or helping its economy recover. They have every interest in continuing to strip-mine the country of its wealth, assets and enterprises.

They want Greece serving as model for what’s intended for the rest of Europe – thirdworldizing the continent for profit, the same thing planned for America.

Meanwhile, posturing by both sides continues. Troika officials warned Greece of isolation and possible Grexit by rejecting their bailout terms.

Athens frames things as only deciding yes or no on accepting them – not on Eurozone membership. Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis indicated a possible European Court of Justice injunction to prevent Grexit.

“The EU treaties make no provision for euro exit and we refuse to accept it,” he said. “Our membership is not negotiable.”

On Monday, huge crowds demonstrated outside parliament in Athens supporting a no vote on Troika terms. It’s hard imagining why long-suffering Greeks would vote yes for greater pain.

They’ll have little choice either way. Supporting Tsipras (by voting no) means he’ll negotiate for somewhat less increased austerity than Troika officials demand.

Voting yes means accepting indentured servitude. Grexit assures harder than ever hard times before economic recovery is possible. Remaining trapped in the Eurozone straightjacket assures none at all.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected]. His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”. Visit his blog site at

Obama Removes TPP’s Anti-Slavery Clause, Then Attacks Confederate Flag As “Symbol Of Slavery”


By: Kit Daniels |

Hypocrisy: Obama defends slavery, then attacks rebel flag for ties to slavery.

Right before he publicly attacked the Confederate flag as a “symbol of slavery,” President Obama quietly removed an anti-slavery provision from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement.

“The provision, which bars countries that engage in slavery from being part of major trade deals with the U.S., was written by Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.),” the Huffington Post reported in May. “At the insistence of the White House, Menendez agreed to modify his language to say that as long as a country is taking ‘concrete’ steps toward reducing human trafficking and forced labor, it can be part of a trade deal.”

“Under the original language, the country that would be excluded from the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership pact is Malaysia.”

Malaysia is a major hub for human trafficking in Southeast Asia, with enslaved men, women, and children subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking, according to the State Dept.

“Why, in the year 2015, is the White House teaming up with Republican leaders essentially to defend the practice of slavery?” The Huffington Post added.

It was only a month later that President Obama attacked the Confederate flag as a “symbol of slavery.”

“[Removing the flag] would not be an insult to the valor of Confederate soldiers; it would simply be an acknowledgment that the cause for which they fought — the cause of slavery — was wrong,” he said during a June 26 eulogy in Charleston, S.C.

In other words, Obama defended slavery when it benefitted the TPP, but then attacked the Confederate flag for its historic link to slavery because it was politically expedient.


Obamacare Is A Public Requiem By Supreme Decree

“The Congressional Record will forever show that [Obamacare] was passed in a romper room of overgrown children seemingly barely old enough to keep from peeing on themselves.” –Matt Taibbi

Do you have an absolute right to refuse medical treatment? Well, if you recognize the immutable authority of natural rights, you must defend the birthright of individuals to reject the quackery of government-imposed medicine. Common law clearly discerns that there are limits on the power of governments to force human beings into becoming pinned up sheep, against their will. Already far too many cowardly citizens are eager to comply with the next dictate of a tyrannical regime. Subsequently, when the death panels summon you into their diagnostic pool of drugs, why would you want to accept the pharmaceutical prescription for a controlled and managed demise?

Obamacare is unmistakably a tax. If government levees a tariff on a taxpayer, that is not news. However, when inclusion into a collectivist system of government medicine becomes mandatory, the life essence of individual will is sucked out of the body of an immortal spirit.

The legality of the mandates is up for grabs by a tribunal of Star Chamber jurists. The sideshow about recusal, rivals reality TV programming and confuses the constitutional illiterates. Solicitor General Elena Kagan, in all her glory, conveyed her delight. “I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing,” Kagan said to Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe in one of the emails.

obamacareCNSnews reports,

“The March 2010 email exchange between Kagan and Tribe raises new questions about whether Kagan must recuse herself from judging cases involving the health-care law that Obama signed–and which became the target of legal challenges–while Kagan was serving as Obama’s solicitor general and was responsible for defending his administration’s positions in court disputes.

According to 28 USC 455, a Supreme Court justice must recuse from “any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” The law also says a justice must recuse anytime he has “expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy” while he “served in governmental employment.”

The argument made by the Nation that Justice Clarence Thomas must recuse himself from any ruling on the Affordable Care Act, because of his wife’s work as a conservative activist and lobbyist, where she specifically agitated for the repeal of “Obamacare”, conveniently ignores reality. Kagan was the person appointed to represent the federal government before the Supreme Court of the United States. Thomas was not a lobbyist. The difference should be self-evident for any objective observer.

The essential question never asked is how a nation of inherent autonomous individuals, would allow a politicized court to rule on natural human right authority. Your right to refuse inclusion into a medical insurance scheme, designed for gently leading you down death’s road, is inalienable. Obamacare is a question of exercising the right NOT to participate, much less about forced tribute to pay for the costs of hypochondriacs, who believe physicians are gracious drug pushers.

The electorate made their voice heard in the 2010 elections. The Tea Party eruption was largely a spontaneous repudiation of Obamacare. Criticism of the 112th Congress should be directed against the House for not having the guts to issue and vote upon articles of impeachment against the pretender president, who is bent on destroying the civil rights of mentally healthy citizens.

So why is the nation suffering from the tyranny of the inflicted? Wendell Potter, a former CIGNA executive-turned-whistleblower, lays out the reason in plain simple language.

“Opponents of the Affordable Care Act who believe the Supreme Court will declare the law unconstitutional are going to be disappointed next year when a majority of the nine justices vote to uphold it. It will likely be a 5-4 decision, but moderate conservative Anthony Kennedy will, I’m confident, recognize that without the law, the free-market system of health insurance, so highly valued by conservatives, will implode, sooner rather than later.

Here’s the reality. The provision of Obamacare at the heart of the constitutional challenge — the requirement that all Americans will have to buy health insurance if they’re not eligible for a public plan like Medicare or Medicaid — is a “must have” for the nation’s health insurance industry.”

If conservatives really value a free-market health insurance system, by what claim of legitimacy can court dictums be imposed, upon individuals who rationally and willfully refuse to be part of that medical injection revolving door treatment? A free-market business, especially the medicine cartel, needs to re-invent itself, not seek government imposed guaranteed funding subsidies.

In the NBC video report, the prospects that some conservative justices may well uphold this new expansion of government fiat into the lives of Americans is chilling. Jay Sekulow on MSNBC Discussing ObamaCare at the Supreme Court asks the question: Where will it stop? Expanding brand new federal powers is not an authentic conservative viewpoint.

The supreme decree for public enslavement that Obamacare represents, does not originate with the decision from the Supreme Court. It comes from the pathological sickness of the Nanny State, accepted by millions of intellectual cripples and self-absorbed government syncopates, looking for a bigger welfare check. Just maybe self-reliant folks, who go to great pains to live a healthy lifestyle, just do not want to be part of the medical meat grinder.

Reality Check: ObamaCare & Death Panels by Raven Clabough provides an update.

“Democrats found a way to achieve their goal by way of regulation instead, introduced by Obama Medicare chief Dr. Donald Berwick. A new Medicare regulation implemented on January 1, 2011 pays doctors to advise patients on options for end-of-life care, which includes advanced directives to forego aggressive life-sustaining treatment.

In addition to the end-of-life Medicare rule, state governments are implementing “death panels” of sorts to help handle their budget woes.”

Now view contracting positions on the impact of this reality in the video, Obamacare Death Panels Are Back!!! Even if you dismiss the prediction that Obamacare makes a concerted effort to rush your demise and hasten your mortality, prospects of arbitrary rationing are inevitable.

Dr. Donald J. Palmisano writes in the Washington Times,

grim reaper“With Medicare’s trustees predicting the Medicare program will go bankrupt in 2024 – five years earlier than was projected before the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – even Americans who strongly supported Obamacare have little choice but to acknowledge that Medicare must be reformed – and soon. While lawmakers continue to argue about the best way to protect this vital program for the seniors it serves and those who it has yet to serve, there is a growing bipartisan consensus that the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) is one provision of the new health law that will do more to undermine the program than save it.

Unfortunately, most people in the country, including seniors relying on Medicare, have no idea what IPAB is or how it will affect their lives if it ever becomes operational. More concerning, President Obama decided to make the board the centerpiece of his efforts to reduce the deficit by calling for it to be strengthened – not eliminated. Starting in 2015, the IPAB will give 15 unelected bureaucrats unprecedented power to slash billions of dollars from Medicare when spending exceeds targeted growth rates. The cuts made by the board will come on top of the $500 billion that was transferred from Medicare to a new entitlement program as a result of the new health care law.”

Add to this discretionary allocation, the revolting practice of exceptions. The issuance of waivers from the law to political favorites or “too big to fail” conglomerates, is blatantly a violation of equal protection. Yet, in the hologram construct that passes for lawful government, the whims of class warfare, becomes the standard for this abhorrent Obama administration. The favoritism of the corporate/state economy at the expense of main street free enterprise is as vivid as it has even been. The working poor and the self-employed can kiss their economic future goodbye. Obama wants the middle class to suck it up and become dependent parasites, in the brave new world of coerced medical experimentation.

The social fascists that bleed for universal health care, provided by a single payer bureaucracy are fundamentally statists. Strategies for repeal are weak and remote. Nina Owcharenko in Repealing Obamacare and Getting Health Care Right, describes accurately the problem but is unrealistic for a political solution.

“Congress must repeal the new law. Congress cannot build sound market-based health care reform on the PPACA foundation, which is utterly incompatible with a health care system based on consumer choice and free markets.

Beyond the unprecedented mandates, new taxes, massive entitlement expansion, unworkable and costly insurance provisions, and its failure to control costs, the new law concentrates enormous power in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It creates a giant network for the federal micromanagement of health plans, benefits, insurance markets, and unprecedented intervention into the details of health care financing and the delivery of medical care.”

Repeal of Obamacare is justified. However, the supreme decree that enacted the original legislation comes from an inept and illicit political class. They will resist to the death, retracting their handy work. Even with new replacement legislators, the executive administration envisions a new cash cow for milking. If the Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of Obamacare, your duty is to opt out of the government medial payment system. Encourage the implosion, or resign to total enslavement. This is your terminal and only existential choice.

SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. “Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at

Don’t Look For Freedom Of Expression In Ecuador


Two years ago Ecuador declared the end of Free Speech after passing a new law called the Communications Act, which allows the government to establish what information is allowed in the media and this information can be published.

Since the passing of the law, the Superintendency of Communication, the official agency that oversees alleged media violations has sanctioned 198 media outlets. This agency has also passed 506 resolutions and take on 313 processes, of which 185 have translated into economic sanctions that resulted in the collection of $ 201,596.

In addition to the sanctions, media have also had to publish article “corrections” imposed on the by the Ecuadorian government, in which the media reluctantly accepts alleged mistakes in the reporting, but that in reality are news reports loaded with government written information.

In Ecuador, the media not only cannot freely research and publish their own reports, but they also must print whatever material the government sends them. In a recent case, The Ministry of Communications sent out to newspapers a draft of its new list of taxes and policies referring to reforms of the Social Security Act for its immediate publication.

The situation has been described as abusive and authoritarian by many advocates of freedom of the press, including the Ecuadorian Association of Newspaper Editors. According to critics, the same type of practices now being imposed on newspapers had already been pushed on television channels and and radio stations.

“Now they have discovered that they can impose content to newspapers,” said Mauricio Alarcon, from the Andean Foundation for the Observation and Study of Media, which is considered to be abusing the right of correction and reply to impose content and media subjects.

“Upon receipt of the texts, newspapers must publish  the content as is, as diagrammed by government and with the exact headlines, epithets and insults against the medium itself.”

The government produced wording is not hidden, and for those who attempt to publish real news, the constraints to work increases every day. This week, a newspaper called the Daily Express reported that for interviews with secretaries of state they had been asked to sed the resumes of the reporters who would interview the government representatives.

“Of course we will not deliver the resumes. If they grant the interviews we will have them, but if they refuse, then it will be too bad.” Apparently, in 99% of cases such interviews are not granted which is seen by media editors as an attempt by the government to censor the media.

“I think this is a clear attempt to try to silence newspapers, harass us so that at the end we stop publishing anything for fear of getting into a legal fight or a financial penalty,” said Jorge Sánchez, editor at the Expreso.

“After 24 months of application of the law, there is more freedom of expression than ever in Ecuador,” says Carlos Ochoa,  the head of the Superintendency of Communication.

Ochoa reinforced the fact that since October 2013, when his office was founded, 506 processes have been made and 313 resolutions have been issued, of which 185 were economic sanctions, as if dissent is supposed to be punished by law.

Luis R. Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others. Luis has worked as a news reporter, on-air personality for Live and Live-to-tape news programs. He has also worked as a script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news. Read more about Luis.

The Liquidity Crisis Intensifies: ‘Prepare For A Bear Market In Bonds’

bear market

Are we about to witness trillions of dollars of “paper wealth” vaporize into thin air?  During the next financial crisis, a lot of “wealthy” investors are going to be in for a very rude awakening.  The truth is that securities are only worth what someone else is willing to pay for them, and that is why liquidity is so important.  Back on April 17th, I published an article entitled “The Global Liquidity Squeeze Has Begun“, but it didn’t get nearly as much attention as many of my other articles do.  But now that the liquidity crisis is intensifying, hopefully people will start to grasp the implications of what is happening.  The 76 trillion dollar global bond bubble is threatening to implode, and if it does, the amount of “paper wealth” that could potentially be lost during the months ahead is almost unimaginable.

For those that do not consider the emerging liquidity crisis to be important, I would suggest that they check out what the financial experts are saying.  For instance, the following comes from a recent Bloomberg report

There are three things that matter in the bond market these days: liquidity, liquidity and liquidity.

How — or whether — investors can trade without having prices move against them has become a major worry as bonds globally tanked in the past few months. As a result, liquidity, or the lack of it, is skewing markets in new and surprising ways.

Things have already gotten so bad that Zero Hedge says that some fund managers “are starting to panic” about the lack of liquidity in the marketplace…

Fund managers who together control trillions in assets are starting to panic in the face of an acute bond market liquidity shortage.

Dealer inventories have collapsed in the post-crisis regulatory regime, eliminating the traditional source of liquidity in secondary corporate credit markets, while HFTs and central banks have combined to create the conditions under which USTs and German Bunds can, at any given time, trade like penny stocks (October’s Treasury flash crash and May’s dramatic Bund rout are the quintessential examples).

For a moment, just imagine what would happen if someone yelled “fire” in a very crowded movie theater, and the only exit was a very small doggie door that only one person at a time could squeeze through.  According to experts, that is what the bond market could soon look like

When the unwind comes, like we’ve seen in the past few months, it comes abruptly and sharply as the exit door is tiny,” said Ryan Myerberg, a London-based fund manager at Janus Capital Group Inc., which oversees about $190 billion.

Are you starting to get the picture?

In the end, I believe that those that “squeezed through the door” during this time period are going to be very glad that they got out while they still could.

For much more on the coming bond collapse, check out this YouTube video from Ron Paul in which he explains why we should “prepare for a bear market in bonds”…

Another very prominent voice that is deeply concerned about bonds is Carl Icahn.  The following is what he told CNBC on Wednesday…

Carl Icahn warned investors on Wednesday that he believes the market is “extremely overheated—especially high-yield bonds.”

I think the public is walking into a trap again as they did in 2007,” the activist investor told CNBC’s “Fast Money Halftime Report.” “I think it’s almost the duty of well-respected investors, like myself I hope, to warn people, to tell people, that really you are making errors.”

Icahn compared the current market situation to the prerecession days, when mortgage-backed securities were being widely sold. “It’s almost deja vu,” he said.

Let’s talk about high-yield bonds for a moment.  Prior to the last financial crisis, they started crashing way before stocks did, and now we see the exact same pattern repeating once again.

Normally high yield credit tracks stocks very closely.  When there is a disconnect, that can be a huge sign of trouble.  The following chart comes from Zero Hedge, and it brilliantly demonstrates how similar things are today to the period just before the stock market crash of 2008…


It is glaringly apparent that we are due for a “correction”.  And even though stocks have recently hit brand new record highs, there are rumblings under the surface that a big move down is right around the corner.

For example, USA Today is reporting that mutual fund investors have pulled more money out of stocks than they have put in for 16 weeks in a row….

In a sign of stock market nervousness on Main Street, mutual fund investors have yanked more money out of U.S. stock funds than they put in for 16 straight weeks.

The last time domestic stock funds had positive net cash inflows was in the week ending Feb. 25, according to data from the Investment Company Institute, a mutual fund trade group.

In the week ended June 17, the most recent data available, mutual funds that invest in U.S. stocks suffered net outflows of $3.45 billion, according to the ICI.

Since late February, U.S. stock funds have suffered estimated outflows of nearly $55 billion. Those net withdrawals come despite the fact the benchmark Standard & Poor’s 500 hit a fresh record high of 2130.82 on May 21 and the Dow Jones industrial average notched a fresh record on May 19.

Those that are smart are getting out while the getting is good.

In all the time that I have been publishing The Economic Collapse Blog, I have never seen stocks so primed for a crash.  If you were writing up a scenario for a textbook that imagined what a lead up to a major stock market crash would look like, you could very easily use the last six months as a model.

For a long time, many people out there (including some of my readers) have been very impatiently waiting for the financial markets to crash.  But this is not something that any of us should want to see.  When this next great financial crisis comes, it is going to be absolutely horrible.  Millions upon millions of workers will lose their jobs, and there will be tremendous economic suffering all over the planet.

Tomorrow I plan to share something that is going to shock a lot of people.

It is going to be something that I have never done before, but the time has come.

Stay tuned…

Michael T. Snyder is a graduate of the McIntire School of Commerce at the University of Virginia and has a law degree and an LLM from the University of Florida Law School. He is an attorney that has worked for some of the largest and most prominent law firms in Washington D.C. and who now spends his time researching and writing and trying to wake the American people up. You can follow his work on The Economic Collapse blog, End of the American Dream and The Truth Wins. His new novel entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on

Is Charleston Shooting A Trojan Horse For Internet Censorship?


In a democratic system where political leaders are purportedly responsive to public opinion a pretext must be presented in order to introduce policies that are seen by the majority as controversial or undesirable. News coverage of the Charleston Church shooting over the past several days suggests how a storyline is being shaped by corporate news media and political leaders to lay the groundwork for intensified government regulation of online speech.

daily news roofOn February 26, 2015 the Federal Communications Commission passed a substantial policy document increasing its authority over the web. Such control could potentially be imposed to circumvent First Amendment protections of free speech by targeting websites based on their political perspectives and content.

The Charleston shooting narrative now being drummed in to the public mind maintains that Dylann Roof carried out his heinous act after having been “radicalized” by reading conservative “right wing” political websites. He consequently became filled with “hate” and morphed into a sinister “lone wolf terrorist.”

As ABC News reports:

Investigators believe that the man accused of fatally shooting nine people in a historic Charleston church last week was “self-radicalized,” … meaning that he was not believed to be part of a hate group, and acted alone as well.

That hasn’t stopped investigators from serving subpoenas to internet and telecommunications companies. In doing so, it will allow investigators to recreate the 21-year-old’s entire digital footprint.

Much as the Sandy Hook massacre scenario emphasized Adam Lanza’s wayward parenting and learning disabilities to sell the American public on mandatory mental health screenings for school children, so the antagonist of the Charleston church shooting is plagued by exposure to “radicalizing” content via the internet.

CNN, the UK Guardian and the New York Daily News appear to be the foremost media outlets shaping the Dylann Roof infected by “hate” meme initially preferred by the Southern Poverty Law Center. A cursory LexisNexis search for “‘Dylann Roof’ and hate” for the dates June 17 to June 21 yields 320 print articles and 197 broadcast transcripts since June 17.

Guardian — 25
NY Daily News — 21
LA Times — 12
McClatchy — 12
Wash Post — 12
NY Times — 9
USA Today — 4
NY Post — 4
Phil Inquirer — 4

CNN — 68
FoxNews — 13
MSNBC — 12
CBS New — 9
Canadian TV — 8
NPR — 8
NBC News — 5
ABC News 3

Another search for “‘Dylann Roof’ and terrorism OR terrorist” reveals many of the same venues emphasizing this theme, with 124 print article and 96 transcripts.

Guardian — 15
NY Daily News — 4
NY Times — 4
LA Times — 3
McClatchy Tribune — 3
Atlant Journ Const — 3
Wash Post — 2

CNN — 53
MSNBC — 12
FoxNews — 9
CBS New — 4
Canadian TV — 2
NPR — 1
NBC News — 0
ABC News 0

True to form, even before funeral arrangements could be made for the slain, the Obama administration and its allies had begun waving the bloody shirt for gun control. It may soon be doing so to impose fines on or outright censor websites that may “radicalize” impressionable minds in order to save us from ourselves.  The exercise of prior restraint of expression against any party regardless of their espoused and articulated views is fundamentally unconstitutional and antithetical to America’s core values.

Among other freedoms slowly but surely taken away since September 11, 2001, online speech and a free internet are in jeopardy as never before, to a significant degree because particularly in times of crisis much of the US public are too quick to allow the major corporate media and punditocracy to do their thinking for them.

Professor James F. Tracy is an Associate Professor of Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University. James Tracy’s work on media history, politics and culture has appeared in a wide variety of academic journals, edited volumes, and alternative news and opinion outlets. James is editor of Union for Democratic Communication’s Journal Democratic Communiqué and a contributor to Project Censored’s forthcoming publication Censored 2013: The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2011-2012. Additional writings and information are accessible at

Texas Clinics Turning Away Unvaccinated Children


By: Adan Salazar |

Hippocratic oath takes backseat to Big Pharma inoculation program.

A network of clinics in Texas has issued new guidelines asserting their facilities will no longer take children as patients if they have not been vaccinated.

Austin Regional Clinic, the largest healthcare provider network in the Central Texas region serving close to half a million residents, announced today they will begin prohibiting children who are not up to date on vaccine requirements from being seen by doctors starting tomorrow.

“The physicians and staff at Austin Regional Clinic support immunizations,” a statement on the ARC site says. “If you plan not to immunize your child, we prefer that you choose another practice. We do not want to place the rest of our patients at risk of contracting vaccine-preventable illnesses.”

“Parents who are unwilling to commit to a vaccination schedule will need to find another physician outside of ARC,” a press release states.

The ARC’s recommended vaccine schedule lists at least 21 innoculations infants should receive before the first year of age, many of which can admittedly cause severe adverse reactions – including death – largely in part to the ease by which toxicants can permeate children’s underdeveloped blood-brain barriers.

Notably, the list also recommends children receive a dose of Merck’s controversial Gardasil vaccine by age nine, despite reports that hundreds of young women in the US have died, and tens of thousands have been harmed by it. “Routine dosing intervals are recommended,” a handout from the clinic states.

Specifically, the clinic says parents may be confused about vaccines due to “misinformation in the media and on biased websites.”

Perhaps they find it biased to point out the fact that the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has, via a secretive, letigious network of courts, paid out nearly $3 billion to families who’ve suffered death or other debilitating side effects as a result of vaccines.

Russ Krienke, ARC’s chief medical officer, said the decision was based on ensuring the “facilities are safe” for all of its visiting patients.

“[W]hile we respect the right of families to make their own choices for their children, we also respect the trust our patients put in us to ensure the safety of all, and our policies must honor that trust,” Krienke said.

The clinic’s announcement follows passage of California’s SB 277 mandatory vaccination bill, which forces all public school attendees be up to date on their vaccine requirements as mandated by the state’s department of public health.