Category Archives: Government

Brilliant Woman Sticks It To Judge With Mix Of Education And Expletives (VIDEO)

One common aspect of legal corruption is how judges trick people into being”federal citizens” with Government-granted privileges, rather than state citizens with unalienable rights.

One common aspect of legal corruption is how judges trick people into being”federal citizens” with Government-granted privileges, rather than state citizens with unalienable rights.

Legal corruption in the US has been exposed by a brilliant woman whose name is Tamah Jada Clark. She recently served a most unusual notice upon the courts in Georgia. It is highly unlikely you will ever have seen something like this! Clark’s legal Notice, entitled “To F*ck This Court and Everything that it Stands For“, is a highly entertaining and knowledgeable piece of writing. It displays a great depth of knowledge of law, the American legal system, natural and unalienable rights, the history of the United States and other principles of sovereignty, mixed with raw emotion and colorful expletives. It is fueled with tremendous knowledge and righteous anger, directed against a high-up representative of a system that is seeking to enslave the overwhelming majority of mankind. To some, it may seem unnecessarily crude or not academic or dry enough; but the reason I love it is because it encapsulates exactly the kind of spirit humanity needs to rise up, kick out the impostors, and attain global peace and freedom.

(Warning: Graphic Language)

Corrupt Judge Willis Hunt the Target of Clark’s Forceful Words

Clark has commented upon The Freedom Articles before, in my article entitled “16th Amendment Income Tax Fraud: Evidence Shows it Was Never Ratified!“, where she links to her free and well researched guide “Why Most Americans Do Not Inherently Owe Federal Income Taxes“. In that guide she explains how judge Willis Hunt has repeatedly engaged in legal corruption and denied her justice, and how she is consequently exposing him and the entire system he represents. It is well worth reading. The basis is simple yet widely misunderstood: there is a big difference between a federal citizen and a state citizen. They are, in Clark’s words, “mutually exclusive concepts”. A federal citizen is a creation of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution in 1868, which created a whole new class of citizenry, ostensibly to ensure everyone was equal and to stop slavery. However, like many aspects of the global conspiracy, there is always the public reason for doing something, and the real reason for doing something.

US Federal Citizenship is a Trap to Strip You of Your Sovereignty

US Federal citizenship may seem like a dandy idea until you read the fine print. By accepting that title, you immediately give up sovereignty, rights and freedoms. Why? Because the real power and authority in American society (and any society for that matter) comes from The People. The People got together and formed States. The States then got together and formed a union to create a loose, weak, decentralized Federal Government, bound by the Constitution. That Federal Government then creates citizens. Here is an (abridged) chain of authority (there is more to the story than this, because the Federal Government has also created fake States etc. under its corporate jurisdiction, but this will do for illustration):

We The People

v

States

v

Federal Government

v

14th Amendment “federal citizen”

It is a maxim of law that he who creates, controls. The Federal Government is inviting you to step out of your role as one of “We the People” or your title as state citizen, and to step into being a federal citizen. You are then moving from being one of the owners, masters and creators of society, to one of the lowliest employees/slaves in the hierarchy.

Some Excerpts from Clark’s Notice

Clark nails the judge for trying to get away with dismissing her case on a faulty legal basis. Here are some excerpts from it:

“You have presented federal rights and laws to defeat unalienable human rights and laws that supersede them both.”

“The federal government was not created to replace the state governments by any means … after having been oppressed by the King of Great Britain, is that what the Founding Fathers did? They went through Hell and fought the War for Independence just to relinquish their citizens to the federal government and set it up to be more oppressive than the King of Great Britain could ever have been? I think not.”

“Any idiot can take a look into the history of American jurisprudence through studying congressional records, U.S. Supreme court cases, etc. – as I have done – to realize that these United States of America have been overthrown. The American people – due to their own neglect of civic duty and responsibility to educate themselves and their children – have allowed this to happen.”

Beware of Giving Up Unalienable Rights for Civil Rights and Privileges

The moral to the story in all of this is simple: don’t give up your inherent, unalienable, natural rights for Government-granted privileges. The Founding Fathers and all who fought in the battles to break free of King George and the European bankers (the Rothschilds) were striving to set up a society where people “came with” intrinsic rights attached, just by virtue of being alive. These rights could never be legislated or regulated out of existence.

Whether a society shines with freedom or descends into tyranny hinges on matter such as rights vs. privileges, and state citizens vs. federal citizens. Make sure you know the difference, and don’t fall for the legal corruption trying to convince you otherwise.

Sources:

http://tamahjadaclark.com/downloads/why-most-americans-do-not-inherently-owe-federal-income-taxes/


Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of the global conspiracy, from vaccines to Zionism to false flag operations and more, and also including info on natural health, sovereignty and higher consciousness.

Federal Government Ordered To Explain Why It Needs A Cell Phone Kill Switch

Phone_Kill Switch

Monday is the court-ordered deadline for the government to explain a secretive policy that allows it to use a “kill switch” on cell phone service among the population. The policy, adopted by the Department of Homeland Security in 2005, is called Standard Operating Procedure 303 and allows

“…for the orderly shut-down and restoration of wireless services during critical emergencies such as the threat of radio-activated improvised explosive devices.”

It allows the government to cut service “within a localized area, such as a tunnel or bridge, and within an entire metropolitan area.” The policy comes with a murky, questionable history.

The implementation of the policy was a reaction to the 2005 London subway bombing and was deemed necessary for national security. In 2005, all cell service in New York’s Hudson Tunnel was cut off for two weeks—a move that by the DHS’s own admission created

“disorder for both Government and the private sector at a time when use of the communications infrastructure was most needed.”

Due to the secrecy surrounding the policy, there is no concrete documentation to suggest that SOP 303 has been used to cut cell service. In 2011, however, all cell phone communication was cut on San Francisco’s BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit). This was done to disrupt a protest against a violent police officer who killed a homeless man. That same year, the White House claimed that the government had the right to

“control private communications systems in the United States during times of war or other national emergencies.”

In an effort to learn more about the justification for the BART shut down, the Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a FOIA request with DHS in July of 2012. DHS claimed it could not find any relevant documentation, leading EPIC to file a FOIA lawsuit. A lower federal court found the agency insufficiently complied with the request. By February of 2015, however, a higher court sided with a DHS appeal and ruled that

“the [DHS] permissibly withheld much, if not all of SOP 303, because its release…could reasonably be expected to endanger individuals’ lives or physical safety . . . .”

In spite of the federal government’s aggressive attempts to keep this information secret, EPIC filed a request last month for the court to revisit its decision, arguing that “if left in place, [it] would create an untethered ‘national security’ exemption.” This time, the court gave the government until this Monday, April 27, to explain the details of its policy, including under what conditions it may be implemented.

Alan Butler, a lawyer for EPIC, explained plainly that,

“We’re not asking for detailed information about how [SOP 303] works … but about the rationale and the policy guidelines.”

The push toward a “kill switch” has been building for years (and predates cell phones and the Internet). In July of 2012, Obama signed an Executive Order that “granted the authority to seize private facilities when necessary, effectively shutting down or limiting civilian communications.” In 2010, a Senate Subcommittee on “Homeland Security” approved a kill-switch for the Internet and in 2014, the House of Representatives introduced a cell phone kill switch bill in the name of preventing smartphone theft. In August of that same year, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill requiring all smart phones made after July 2015 to have a built in kill switch. The bill has been criticized for granting dangerous power to both law enforcement and hackers.

The use of a kill switch has also been lambasted for what some view as an inability to prevent terrorist attacks. In fact, previous terror attacks have relied not on cellular communication, but merely on an alarm clock built into a phone—which would be unaffected by the use of a kill switch.

The dangers of granting such broad authority to government seem not only abundant, but obvious. As seen in the 2011 BART instance, the state is more than willing to dismantle communication for reasons beyond national security. The power to disrupt the citizens’ right to organize protests against state action is an unconscionable effort to control the population and silence dissent. That the government is so resistant to explain this power is reason enough to distrust it.

As Howard Feld, Senior Vice President of Public Knowledge, a public advocacy group, pointed out,

“Understanding a policy should not compromise national security.”

The DHS stubbornly disagreed. Asked to explain the decision to withhold basic procedural information from the public on the program, it responded only with,

“We have no comment on this.”

Although the court-mandated deadline has come and gone — as of midnight yesterday — without a response from the government, this story will be updated when and if they ever decide to offer an explanation for the shrouded policy.

Originally published at The Anti Media

Obama-Authorized Murder By Drones

 Obama-drones

Obama-authorized drone killings are cold-blooded murder by any standard – mostly affecting noncombatant civilians, innocent men, women and children in harm’s way.

Former Obama White House press secretary Jay Carney lied calling drone strikes “precise, lawful and effective.”

They’re indiscriminate and lawless. They accomplish no geopolitical objectives. They arouse great public anger in targeted countries.

Days earlier, a drone strike killed a US and Italian hostage. A disingenuous White House press secretary statement said:

“It is with tremendous sorrow that we recently concluded that a US government counterterrorism operation in January killed two innocent hostages held by Al-Qaeda since 2011.”

Obama’s dishonest apology to surviving family members rang hollow. He lied saying “(b)ased on the intelligence that we had obtained at the time…we believed that this was an Al Qaeda compound, that no civilians were present…”

“Before any strike is taken, there must be near- certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured – the highest standard we can set.”

Truth is polar opposite. More on this below.

The White House announced an investigation into the incident. Expect whitewash to follow.

Drone killings have nothing to do with counterterrorism. America’s so-called war on terror is phony.

It’s waged to advance Washington’s imperium – through endless direct and proxy wars, including cold-blooded murder by drones.

US development expert Dr. Warren Weinstein and Italian aid worker Giovanni Lo Porto are two of thousands of US victims – murdered by American ruthlessness.

Drones are instruments of state terror. Claims about only targeting terrorists are Big Lies. So is saying using them makes America safer.

A 2012 Stanford/New York University study estimates only 2% of drone victims are so-called high-value targets. Evidence shows drone strikes facilitate anti-American recruitment.

The study said “US drone strike policies cause considerable and under-accounted-for harm to the daily lives of ordinary civilians, beyond death and physical injury.”

“Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan (and other targeted countries), striking homes, vehicles, and public spaces without warning.”

“Their presence terrorizes men, women, and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities.”

“Those living under drones have to face the constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves. These fears have affected behavior.”

Targeted areas are struck multiple times in quick succession – a practice called “double tap.”

Family members, friends and bystanders arriving to help victims are themselves murdered or maimed by drone attacks.

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates over 4,400 innocent civilians murdered by US drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen alone since 2004 – besides many more in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and other US war theaters.

Dozens of Western civilians have been killed, including at least 10 Americans.

Britain’s Reprieve human rights group estimates 28 noncombatants are killed to eliminate one so-called terrorist.

Reprieve’s Jennifer Gibson said “(d)rone strikes have been sold to the American public on the claim that they’re ‘precise.”

“But they are only as precise as the intelligence that feeds them. There is nothing precise about intelligence that results in the deaths of 28 unknown people, including women and children, for every (so-called real or invented) ‘bad guy’ the US goes after.”

John Kerry lied earlier claiming “(t)he only people we fire a drone at are confirmed terrorist targets at the highest level, after a great deal of vetting that takes a long period of time.”

“We don’t just fire a drone at somebody and think they’re a terrorist.”

It bears repeating. Drone strikes are indiscriminate, lawless, cold-blooded murder. The overwhelming number of victims are noncombatant civilian men, women and children.

They’re not so-called terrorists by any standard. Claiming otherwise is one of many Big Lies told to justify US ruthlessness.

In Yemen alone, US drone wars raged since 2002. Hundreds of Yemeni civilians perished. Obama killed many more noncombatants by drones than George Bush – with months left in his tenure to murder many more.

Reprieve’s Jennifer Gibson was blunt saying “Obama needs to be straight with the American people about the human cost of this program.”

“(H)is claims that this is a precise program look like nonsense, and the risk that it is in fact making us less safe looks all too real.”

RAND Corporation senior fellow Seth Jones says “no major terrorist organization in the world…has (ever) been defeated by drones.”

It bears repeating. They’re instruments of state terror. They’re used to commit cold-blooded murder – harming innocent civilians most.


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”. www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html Visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com.

April EBOM: RATS!

rats-cover-Keith Perkins

MHB has admittedly not had an “EBOM” in several months. The April 2015 Electronic Book of the Month is RATS! Your Guide to Protecting Yourself Against Snitches, Informers, Informants, Agents Provocateurs, Narcs, Finks, and Similar Vermin by Claire Wolfe. (H/t to Professor Darrell Hamamoto for bringing the document to our attention.)

This short, valuable guide is something that every citizen will probably need at some point in their lives. The volume may be downloaded by right-cliking here.

From the first pages of RATS!

This book is for you if …

You are a non-violent person engaged in any activity that may be controversial, illegal, or merely “sensitive” or unconventional. These days, anything out of the ordinary can make you a target.

Some people who could use this book:

Anti-war or environmental activists
Recreational drug users
Participants in the underground economy or anybody who
does business in cash
Critics of local or national powers-that-be
Anyone whose profession involves “sensitive” information or
activities
Gun owners or dealers
Third-party or “fringe” political activists
Hobbyists who work with dangerous materials
Photographers/videographers
Religious dissidents
People with offshore or unconventional investments
(including perfectly legitimate ones)

It doesn’t matter where you fall in the political spectrum or even if you’re apolitical. If police might target you or your activities, you need to understand how snitches could mess up your life.

This book is NOT for you if …

You aim to commit violence against innocent people. In that case, reporting on you isn’t snitching, it’s self defense.

What exactly is a snitch?

There are a lot of different types of snitches. We could write an encyclopedia defining them. But we’re going to keep this simple.

For purposes of the book, a snitch is anybody who inserts him-or herself into your non-violent activities on behalf of government. “Government” may mean local cops. It could also mean the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, or a host of other state or federal agencies. It’s absolutely mind-boggling how many seemingly innocuous agencies these days have arrest powers, armed enforcers — and snitches employed in sneaky sting operations. And thousands of them use snitches.

There are two common categories of snitch you need to lookout for:

The infiltrator/agent provocateur. This is someone (often a professional) who is inserted into a group for an active purpose, such as disrupting the group, or worst, talking formerly innocent (or at least formerly non-violent) people into committing crimes in order to bust them. Agents provocateurs may, among other things, try to turn nonviolent protest into violent action, thus discrediting movements, giving excuses for crackdowns, and giving more publicity and power to government agencies.

The informer/informant. This snitch is often a legitimate member of a group or social circle who continues to be active while giving information to the police. This person may be acting under duress (to save his own skin after being arrested, for instance). This person may be hoping the cops will pay with money, drugs, or ongoing criminal immunity for her dubious “services.” While this person isn’t necessarily a professional agent provocateur, he may nevertheless try to talk friends into committing crimes so he can get more credibility or rewards from his police handlers.

These aren’t the only types of snitches. For example, there’s also what we’ll call the “accidental snitch” — though idiot snitch might be more appropriate. This is the person who simply can’t keep her mouth shut about illegal or controversial activities. Cops love these guys! They don’t even have to threaten them, pay them, hire them, train them, or gain any leverage over them. They just sit back and listen to them reveal secrets.

Then there’s the type of snitch the British call a grass and old American gangsters might have called a stool pigeon. This is a person who blabs to cops or other government agents after you (and probably he) have already been arrested. This person isn’t going to interfere with your activities; that’s already been done. He’s “only” going to give sworn affidavits and courtroom testimony against you, justifying it as a means of saving his own skin. There’s not much you can do about this person. By the time you learn one of your former friends is a “stoolie,” it’s too late.

There are vengeance snitches — people who turn on friends and associates after having a falling out or not getting their way. There are jailhouse snitches — either deliberately planted in your cell after you’ve been arrested or just opportunists who happen to be there and are willing to share whatever you say (or make up lies about things you said).

Each and every one of these people is a betrayer of friendship and trust. All of them are just plain rats — and they’re as welcome in the company of good people as rats are in a pantry.

To keep things simple we’re going to call them all snitches — though we’ll differentiate when we need to help you look out for specific problems.


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 memoryholeblog.com.

Deciphering The Shadows Of Power (VIDEO)

Shadow-People

On the April 20 episode of Real Politik James speaks with historian and bestselling author James Perloff about the hidden elite influences on Western societies, politics and history over the past century. Mr. Perloff is the author of, most recently, Truth is a Lonely Warrior: Unmasking the Forces Behind Global Destruction (2013) and the classic The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline (1988). He has conducted research and published articles on America’s hidden history for over thirty years.

Perloff has also written the script for the soon-to-be-released Free Mind Films feature length production, Shadow Ring, also largely based on his historical research.

Download

The two discuss Perloff’s most recent book, specifically addressing elite influences on the media, culture, and Americans’ understanding of their national history.

James Perloff’s website is jamesperloff.com

Interview Highlights

In Truth is a Lonely Warrior James spends significant time examining media and culture, examining early in the book how media power is concentrating more and more into fewer hands.

This oligarchy … knew that to get public acceptance of its wars and its trade treaties and so forth, you’ve got to influence public opinion. But what better way than the media? And that’s why today you have over 90% of the media being owned by six corporations. Those six corporations are Time Warner, Walt Disney, Viacom, Newscorp, CBS and NBC Universal. In 1983 it was 50 corporations controlling 90% of America’s media. You can see how these mergers of entertainment and news are generating this monopoly where it’s almost comparable to a communist state, where you have just six corporations running everything. And there’s not much difference between these corporations.

… As I like to point out, it’s the boss who calls the shots. Since these TV stations, journals, and movie studios have the same owner they cannot step outside the lines. In fact, I was the guest on one alternative media network, and the host of that particular radio show told me that he used to work for one of these big, 50,000 watt radio stations. He had a talk show, and one day he did a show on 9/11. Then he was called in to the [manager’s] office and told, “You never talk about 9/11 on this station again.” That’s why he left and went in to alternative media. Anyone can investigate this fairly easily. I have a blog post on my website, called “A Century of Mainstream Media Lies,” which demonstrates how the media has in fact been used to give the public false illusions that have led us in to wars and other negative developments.

James was a contributor to the John Birch Society’s main organ, The New American, for over thirty years. Since he became a more vocal critic of Zionism, however, he has stopped publishing there to avoid confirming the well-known smear of that organization’s alleged anti-semitism. “They were the original truth movement back in the seventies when I joined them,” he observes.

They were already talking about the Council on Foreign Relations and Federal Reserve. And, really there was no other mass organization that was doing that. Of course, they were typically labelled “Nazi,” “racist,” when in fact they weren’t that at all. I can guarantee you, they never mentioned Zionism … They were the alternative media choice for a lot of people. There weren’t too many others. Back when I was a kid in the sixties growing up in the Boston area, if you wanted to get news there were very limited choices. You could either read the Boston Globe or the Boston Herald–the Globe represented basically the Democratic Party point of view and the Herald represented the Republican point of view–or you could watch the three TV networks–CBS, NBC and ABC, and beyond that what could you do? If you went to the public library and looked up “Federal Reserve” you would not find Eustace Mullins’ book there. G. Edward Griffin had not written his book yet. And so all you had was what the World Book Encyclopaedia had to say about the Federal Reserve and what the government wanted you to know, unless you happened to know somebody in the Birch Society, or one of the other very few alternative groups back then. There was no internet. You had no way of finding out the truth, and that’s one of the advantages today we have with shows like this and with the internet we can all interconnect and communicate. And so many people have learned the truth as a result of this modern technology.

In his research on elites James Perloff has come to the conclusion that there are several methods elites use for destabilizing countries, with wars being the most effective. Yet other techniques, he argues, involve a more subtle undermining of a nation’s political processes and culture that could be easily confused with modernization. He refers to these as

secondary means of destroying national sovereignty to restructure the world and make way for this new world order and world government … The Illuminati have long opposed monarchies. and the reason is quite simple, Let’s say that you’re a Rothschild bankster, and you want to take over an imaginary country, Finlandia. And Findlandia is ruled by a king. You have a big problem, because even though you’re a rich Rothschild banker you can’t get in to the bloodline of that king. That is one of major reasons why they have funded revolutions over the years, to overthrow kings and replace them, if not with a communist dictatorship like in the Soviet Union, with a democracy.

The reason that the Illuminati are very fond of democracy–remember “Make the world safe for democracy”–is that they know that with their wealth, that to control a nation and a democracy is 51% of the vote. With your wealth and you running the media, getting 51% of the vote is a cinch.

Perloff asserts that the handful of powerful families and interests routinely use religion and culture as a means by which to gain social and political control, and over the past several decades there can be little confusion over the fact that old traditions and symbols have been replaced by new ones, often delivered through new media conduits such as television. “What they call the ‘Golden Age of Television,’” he notes, “the years of I Love Lucy and Sargent Bilko and The Honeymooners, was designed to get Americans to buy televisions. Because if you had the stuff that you see on TV now then–this occultic stuff and political agendas being advanced on television then like it is now people would not have bought televisions. We had a more traditional moral code back then across the nation, so to get the televisions into the home they had to have this wholesome, G-rated entertainment, right? You had Superman, who would talk about, “Truth, Justice, and the American Way,” right? Father Knows Best. You could never have a show by that name now.”

By the early 1960s television programming began to change, and in 1964 The Beatles were introduced to American audiences, spearheading a set of unmistakably new social sensibilities via their image and music that would be emulated by young men throughout the remainder of the decade. “Dr. John Coleman, former officer at MI6, said The Beatles were really a creation of British intelligence and the Tavistock Institute, which is a think tank devoted to mind control. When we were hippies we always thought of The Beatles as kind of these icons who revolted against the establishment. It turns out that they were actually part of the establishment and the whole dialectic of getting a revolution going and changing the basis of American culture and American thinking.”


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 memoryholeblog.com.

Treason Is Not Patriotic

patriot_act

The Patriot Act is pure treason.   What don’t you understand about the meaning of treason?  The entire purpose for the creation of America is based upon defeating despotism, limiting government on all levels and advancing liberty for individuals.  The State is an unfortunate reality, it needs to be feared and controlled.  Patriotic protection of oppressive government is a sickness.  Love of country means that citizens must oppose tyrannical government.  What is so difficult in understanding the difference between jingoism and traditional civil liberties?  There is nothing conservative about waving the bloody flag for a political structure bent upon destroying individual rights.

A mêlée of deceit is called a War on Terror, but actually is a War Of Terror.  It is waged upon our own citizens, neighbors and families.  The fraud called the Patriot Act is an immeasurable disgrace and a lethal betrayal.  The Stamp Act was mild in comparison, but in our era of “girlie men” serfs paying homage to the federal tyrant is good citizenship.  Most Americans are fools and deserve contempt for their fervor in obeying an illegitimate regime.  Make no mistake, partisan politics is a scam, the entire ruling class are co-conspirators in treason.

Sedition against this band of anti-Americans is the test of true Patriotism.  The Patriot Act is designed to intimidate, suppress and punish citizens who threaten this organized criminal cabal, called elected representatives.  The multicultural approach towards purifying civic submission under the pain of criminality deserves a concerted effort of national civil disobedience.  The real enemy lives among us, makes destructive government policy and enforces malevolent laws.  Government is accountable to the people.  Citizens must never endure self-induced slavery as the price of supporting political leaders.  The risk of indictment is preferable to an existence of delusion.  It is better to understand the real enemy and be marked as a rebel than suspend all rational awareness and buy into the big lie.

You need not look any further than to Michael Savage (real name is Michael Alan Weiner), for a classic example of fraudulent conservatism.  Anyone who has endured the pain of listening to this psychopath knows all too well that the sum total of his politics is embodied in what can be termed “USrael”.  Savage sees the world through an Israel-First prism.  For him being an American is defined as blind support of Zionism.  Anyone who rejects such psychosis is automatically an anti-Semitic.  Don’t be hoodwinked by his warped rhetoric, he is a classic manic totalitarian.  For him the Patriotic Act is mana from heaven.  This propagandist sees the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as a comrade and Larry Franklin’s espionage as required information sharing.  In his Savage Nation, only friends of Israel deserve to be to be immune from the reach of the Patriot Act.

One needs not embrace Rep. John Conyers as a nationalist to value the testimony at the congressional hearing on the Downing Street memos.  The assessment of former intelligence analyst Ray McGovern is directly to the point.  He declared:

“The United States went to war in Iraq for oil, Israel and military bases craved by administration “neocons” so “the United States and Israel could dominate that part of the world.” He said that Israel should not be considered an ally and that Bush was doing the bidding of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. “Israel is not allowed to be brought up in polite conversation,” McGovern said. “The last time I did this, the previous director of Central Intelligence called me anti-Semitic.” Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), who prompted the question by wondering whether the true war motive was Iraq’s threat to Israel, thanked McGovern for his “candid answer.”

The euphemism OIL – oil, Israel, logistics = resource imperialism, the reason for perpetual war, for control of the region.  Ergo, the need to create a fake terrorism for an excuse to sell the traitorous Patriot Act as necessary surrender of domestic civil liberties in order to advance a treasonous foreign policy.

Anti-patriot-act_cartoon

Next, you don’t need to be a card carrying ACLU atheist to be a proponent of individual Bill of Right protections.  The essence of our heritage rests upon a healthy and natural distrust of governmental authoritarianism.  The soundest way to restrain repression is to limit the size, range and scope of State intervention.  The function for legitimate government is to protect our own citizens.  When federal policy is bent upon destroying our way of life, what exactly does another foreign war accomplish?  Certainly it doesn’t protect our own nation nor does it defend individuals.  The phony terrorism is a creation of domestic policy making terrorists.  Fighting abroad to prevent hostility on our shores is absurd, since the true war is internal.  If you can’t grasp the nature of the real enemy, you are doomed and duped into supporting infiltrators, who stole the process of designing and implementing national policy.

If you want to take solace that the House of Representatives has finally curtailed the assault against time-honored liberties under the Patriot Act, don’t celebrate just yet.  Even the collaborators at the New York Times call for concern:

“Thirty-eight Republicans joined with the Democratic minority in denying the FBI blanket power to seize library and bookstore records in terrorism investigations. The action was needed to stop federal agents from conducting secret fishing expeditions . . . Parts of the Patriot Act are reasonable and necessary, but too much of it provides license for federal agents to spy on innocent people and suppress dissent. Bush threatens to veto any change in the act, and Republican leaders would accommodate him by deleting the House’s revision in negotiations with the Senate on a final bill. Protecting civil liberties is never a one-shot exercise. It is crucial that the surprise House coalition defend its vote and the public’s interest.” 

However, the liberal establishment socialists care little for authentic American First interests, any more than the criminal neocon agents bent upon an USrael empire.  The total repeal of this tainted Patriot Act is essential in order for restoration of our birthright.  But don’t hold your breath!  In order to achieve lasting internal security, domestic peace with Israel-First sociopaths must end.

Illustrating the lunacy within supposed minor victories, just examine the House vote withholding dues to spur U.N. changes“It is not for the State Department or even the secretary of state to say when and how the resources of the American people will be spent,” said Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.). Rep. Eric I. Cantor (R-Va.) said “bloated bureaucracy” and “anti-Israel bias” at the United Nations “goes against the grain of common sense in America.”

Such ‘common sense’ that refuses to admit valid criticism of Zionism is the root cause for the War of Terror.

The Washington Times reports:

“Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Republican, principled libertarian and chronic skunk at congressional garden parties, offered an “American sovereignty restoration” amendment calling for the United States to pull out of the United Nations altogether. Mr. Paul noted, correctly, that the case for his amendment had just been made by all the negative comments his colleagues had been airing for the previous two hours.  

Democrats, sensing the politically embarrassing nature of the amendment, immediately demanded a roll-call vote, requiring their Republican colleagues to go on record in support of U.S. membership in the blue helmet/black helicopter society.”

If treason isn’t the historic motivation for supporting the U.N. what other impetus can be verified?  Only when the preponderance of nations team up to challenge USrael does the wrath of the imperial empire come to bear upon the world body.  Ron Paul is correct as usual.  There is nothing patriotic about being a member in the U.N. any more than renewing the tyrannical provisions in the Patriotic Act.  The linkage between the two may not seem obvious for the Realpolitik novice.  However, they share the same source of the oppression.

With so little domestic dissent and effectual opposition against a bankrupt U.S. foreign policy, only those aware of the consequences of a Savage Nation based upon USrael primacy, comes out of the huddled masses of subjugated countries.  Americans better learn well and fast.  They are systematically being reduced to the ranks of the third world for the benefit of elite privilege.  The Patriot Act is a primary stick ready to be used whenever the organized syndicate is threatened.  Do you really believe that being patriotic to USrael is true American loyalty?  Our Bill of Rights would never be honored by the U.N. or under a kosher regime.  The standard needed to judge genuine patriotism requires the repeal of the Patriot Act, the reputation of the NWO stooge world debating body and renouncing the con that the state of Israel is an ally.

The war of terror is real and their command and control center lies within domestic policy traitors.  The fight for our way of life needs to be fought on our own soil, for our own people and because of our own interests.

A patriot must always be ready to defend
 his country against his government.
Edward Abbey
 

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 http://batr.org.

FBI Accused Of Whitewashing Saudi Involvement In 9/11 Attacks Is “Red-Herring”, Propaganda Ploy

9-11-attack

The alleged Saudi involvement in supporting Osama bin Laden, not to mention the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 joint Congressional inquiry pertaining to the insidious role of Saudi Arabia in supporting the hijackers is  part of a propaganda ploy. 

When the report of Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 was released in December 2002, it was met with considerable skepticism. That skepticism grew for a period of time but then was reduced to speculation about what was contained in the 28 pages that had been redacted by the Bush White House.

Various U.S. government leaders have since suggested that the missing 28 pages point to Saudi Arabia’s complicity in the 9/11 crimes. However such musings fail to discuss other important issues, like the links between the Saudi regime and the Western deep state, or the fact that, from the start, even the Saudis were calling for the 28 pages to be released. Discussion of the missing 28 pages also omits mention of the highly suspicious nature of the Inquiry’s investigation and its leaders. (Kevin Ryan, The 9/11 Joint Congressional Inquiry and the 28 Missing Pages, Global Research, March 14, 2014

The report of the FBI 9/11 Review Commission (25 March 2015) has revealed circumstances which allegedly were withheld by the FBI from both the 9/11 Commission headed by former Jersey Governor Thomas Kean as well from the joint Senate House inquiry committee chaired by former Senator Bob Graham. Graham.

And now agencies of the US government including the FBI are being accused of protecting the Saudis.  This alleged Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks has served to precipitate segments of the 9/11 Truth movement into an erroneous and contradictory discourse. On the part of the US government and its intelligence apparatus, the objective is to ultimately build a narrative which will weaken the 9/11 Truth movement.

The purpose of this new propaganda ploy is ultimately to sustain the legend that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks and that Saudi Arabia relentlessly supported Al Qaeda, namely that Saudi Arabia acted as a “state sponsor of terrorism”.

In this regard, the media reports intimate that if the Saudi connection is confirmed by the 28 classified pages, this “would make 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war by a foreign government.”

There is, however, an obvious hiccup in this reasoning: if  the Saudis were indeed the State sponsors of 9/11, why on earth did the US and the Atlantic Alliance (under the doctrine of collective security) choose to wage a “Just War” of retribution against Afghanistan. Did they get their countries mixed up?

9/11 Truth

Many 9/11 Truthers across America are now calling for the release of the 28 classified pages.  They are also accusing the FBI of coverup and complicity.

All eyes are on the classified 28 pages, which document Saudi support for the alleged hijackers. Meanwhile, the irrefutable evidence of controlled demolition of the Twin Towers –not to mention the mysterious collapse of WTC 7 which was announced by CNN and the BBC more than 20 minutes before it occurred–  no longer constitutes the centrefold of the 9/11 Truth movement:  ’The Saudis are behind 9/11 and our government is protecting them.”

Framed in a “Tele Novela” style scenario featuring wealthy Saudis in the plush suburban surroundings of Sarasota, Florida two weeks before 9/11, the New York Post describes the circumstances of Saudi involvement (quoting the FBI 9/11 Review Commission Report) in an article entitled How the FBI is whitewashing the Saudi connection to 9/11: .

“Just 15 days before the 9/11 attacks, a well-connected Saudi family suddenly abandoned their luxury home in Sarasota, Fla., leaving behind jewelry, clothes, opulent furniture, a driveway full of cars — including a brand new Chrysler PT Cruiser — and even a refrigerator full of food.

About the only thing not left behind was a forwarding address. The occupants simply vanished without notifying their neighbors, realtor or even mail carrier.

4117052_1-300x225The 3,300-square-foot home on Escondito Circle (see image right) belonged to Esam Ghazzawi, a Saudi adviser to the nephew of then-King Fahd. But at the time, it was occupied by his daughter and son-in-law, who beat a hasty retreat back to Saudi Arabia just two weeks before the attacks after nearly a six-year stay here.

Neighbors took note of the troubling coincidence and called the FBI, which opened an investigation that led to the startling discovery that at least one “family member” trained at the same flight school as some of the 9/11 hijackers in nearby Venice, Fla.

… The Saudi-9/11 connection in Florida was no small part of the overall 9/11 investigation. Yet it was never shared with Congress. Nor was it mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.

Now it’s being whitewashed again, in a newly released report by the 9/11 Review Commission, set up last year by Congress to assess “any evidence now known to the FBI that was not considered by the 9/11 Commission.” Though the FBI acknowledges the Saudi family was investigated, it maintains the probe was a dead end.

The panel’s report also doesn’t explain why visitor security logs for the gated Sarasota community and photos of license tags matched vehicles driven by the hijackers, including 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta.

The three-member review panel was appointed by FBI Director James Comey, who also officially released the findings.

Former Democratic Sen. Bob Graham, who in 2002 chaired the congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11, maintains the FBI is covering up a Saudi support cell in Sarasota for the hijackers. He says the al-Hijjis “urgent” pre-9/11 exit suggests “someone may have tipped them off” about the coming attacks.

Graham has been working with a 14-member group in Congress to urge President Obama to declassify 28 pages of the final report of his inquiry which were originally redacted, wholesale, by President George W. Bush.

….

Sources who have read the censored Saudi section say it cites CIA and FBI case files that directly implicate officials of the Saudi Embassy in Washington and its consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks — which if true, would make 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war by a foreign government. The section allegedly identifies high-level Saudi officials and intelligence agents by name, and details their financial transactions and other dealings with the San Diego hijackers. It zeroes in on the Islamic Affairs Department of the Saudi Embassy, among other Saudi entities.

The [FBI] review commission, however, concludes there is “no evidence” that any Saudi official provided assistance to the hijackers, even though the panel failed to interview Graham or his two key investigators — former Justice Department attorney Dana Lesemann and FBI investigator Michael Jacobson — who ran down FBI leads tying Saudi officials to the San Diego hijackers and documented their findings in the 28 pages. (emphasis added)

The key figure behind this new wave of propaganda is former Senator Bob Graham, who led the joint inquiry of the Senate and the House intelligence committees together with Rep. Porter Goss, a career CIA official who was subsequently appointed Director of National Intelligence (DNI) by the Bush administration. Graham coordinated the drafting and editing of the report including the 28 classified pages on Saudi Arabia.

While Graham is now heralded by the mainstream media as a 911 Truther, the evidence suggests that immediately in the wake of 9/11, he was involved (together with Porter Goss) in a coverup on behalf of Bush-Cheney. According to Kevin Ryan, “in the months following 9/11, both Goss and Graham rejected calls for an investigation”:  

The Senate voted for one anyway, however, and that led both Bush and Cheney to attempt to stop it or limit its scope. Apparently the best they could do was to make sure that Goss and Graham were put in charge. That seemed to work as the Inquiry began in February 2002, more than five months after the attacks, and the approach taken was one of uncritical deference to the Bush Administration and the intelligence community.

Goss immediately made it clear that the Inquiry would not be looking for guilt or accountability with regard to 9/11. Saying he was “looking for solutions, not scapegoats,” Goss continued to defend the White House with regard to warnings the president had received about an impending attack, saying it was “a lot of nonsense.” The FBI did not cooperate but that didn’t seem to bother Goss and Graham. (Kevin Ryan, The 9/11 Joint Congressional Inquiry and the 28 Missing Pages, Global Research, March 14, 2014

Both the joint inquiry led by Graham and the 9/11 Commission were part of a Big Lie.  And now Bob Graham and 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean are accusing the FBI of camouflage and the Saudis of collusion in the 9/11 attacks, while failing to acknowledge coverup and complicity at the highest levels of the US government.

According to Bob Graham in an interview with the Miami Herald,

 ’The FBI has served America through most of its history. There were stumbles by the agency before 9/11 and since the tragedy there has been a consistent effort to cover up the extent of Saudi Arabia’s involvement.’ (emphasis added)

And because Bob Graham accuses the FBI and the federal government, the 9/11 Truth movement applauds without realizing that these accusations directed against the FBI are “framed” with a view to sustaining the mainstream 9/11 narrative. What is at stake is a desperate ploy to uphold the legend that Muslims were behind 9/11 and that Saudi Arabia was behind the terrorists giving them money, with the FBI involved in a coverup, George W. Bush protecting his Saudi cronies because the Bushes and the bin Ladens were “intimo amigos”.

Former Senator Graham  ”smells a rat” and that rat is the FBI and complicit government agencies:

“This is a pervasive pattern of covering up the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11 by all of the agencies of federal government which have access to information that might illuminate Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11.”

“The 28 pages primarily relate to who financed 9/11, and they point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier,” he said, adding, “I am speaking of the kingdom,” or government, of Saudi Arabia, not just wealthy individual Saudi donors.

But who is the rat? The FBI or Senator Bob Graham who is visibly involved in a coverup on behalf of US intelligence? He accuses US government agencies of negligence, which serves to arouse protest against the FBI by many 9/11 Truthers.

Graham’s staged accusations thereby serve to distract the American public’s attention from the real evidence, amply documented  that the WTC towers were brought down through controlled demolition and that Islamic terrorists were not behind the 9/11 attacks. The issue of Saudi financial support of al Qaeda is not only known and documented since the heyday of the Soviet Afghan war, it is irrelevant in establishing who was behind the terror attacks. Moreover, the contents of the 28 classified pages are known.

In a bitter irony, Graham’s track record (mentioned above) in supporting the official 9/11 narrative on behalf of Bush-Cheney is not mentioned: 

Former Senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.), who co-chaired a congressional inquiry into 9/11 — separate from the 9/11 Commission — stated, as though now it was obvious, “None of the people leading this investigation think it is credible that 19 people — most who could not speak English and did not have previous experience in the United States — could carry out such a complicated task without external assistance.”

Now, Graham says, a breakthrough may finally be around the corner with the upcoming declassification of the 28 pages of the “Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.”

Calling for the official release and publication of the 28 page classified section of the joint inquiry report pertaining to Saudi Arabia is an obvious red-herring. The objective is to confuse matters, create divisions within the 9/11 Truth movement and ultimately dispel the fact that the 9/11 attacks were a carefully organized False Flag event which was used to declare war on Afghanistan as well as usher in sweeping anti-terrorist legislation.

Both the Congressional inquiry as well the 9/11 Commission report are flawed, their objective was to sustain the official narrative that America was under attack on September 11, 2001. And Graham’s role in liaison with the CIA, is “damage control” with a view to protecting those who were behind the demolition of the WTC towers as well sustaining the Al Qaeda legend, which constitutes the cornerstone of US military doctrine under the so-called “Global War on Terrorism”.

Without 9/11 and the “Global War on Terrorism”, the warmongers in high office would not have a leg to stand on. In turn, 9/11 Truth is an encroachment which undermines war propaganda and the US-led campaign of Islamophobia, which is sweeping the Western World.


Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal and Editor of the globalresearch.ca website. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America’s “War on Terrorism”(2005). His most recent book is entitled Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War (2011). He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages.

 

Obama Administration Plotting Adult Vaccination Mandates

mandatory vaccines

By: Alex Newman | The New American

In collaboration with Big Business and special interests, the Obama administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is plotting a new program to track Americans’ vaccination records, wage a massive propaganda campaign to “encourage” more inoculations, and foist more controversial vaccines on adults against their will. Federal bureaucrats and crony capitalists set to profit from the proposal claim the goal is to improve “public health,” and establishment media outlets have largely parroted that line so far. However, critics of the unconstitutional scheme, formally dubbed the “National Adult Immunization Plan” (NAIP), say the ultimate goal is to forcibly vaccinate all Americans and move toward a radical new healthcare paradigm in which medical “treatment” is delivered at gunpoint.

The controversial plot was cooked up and unveiled by the Obama HHS National Vaccine Advisory Committee during its February meeting. If approved by federal bureaucrats, the executive-branch assault would, among other elements, enlist private businesses, churches, and non-profit organizations in a nationwide campaign to prod Americans into accepting the Obama administration’s perpetually expanding list of “recommended” vaccines. The scheme would also offer doctors and other vaccine providers “incentives” — read taxpayer-funded bribes — to shred patient privacy and feed private medical information into state and federal databases to track those who refuse to comply.

The summary of the “five-year national plan,” as official documents describe it, deliberately uses innocent-sounding language to promote the effort. “The NAIP is intended to facilitate coordinated action by federal and nonfederal partners to protect public health and achieve optimal prevention of infectious diseases and their consequences through vaccination of adults,” it states, adding that ObamaCare implementation offers a “unique opportunity” to be used as leverage. “As a national plan, it will require engagement from a wide range of stakeholders to achieve its full vision.” Those stakeholders include just about everybody except the target: You. As always with “national plans” dreamed up by Big Government and Big Business, though, the devil is really in the details.

Critics and medical professionals are already up in arms. After summarizing the growing torrent of recent Obama administration assaults on liberty, Dr. Lee Hieb, an orthopedic surgeon and past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, said the NAIP scheme was an especially troubling attack on the liberties of Americans. Calling it “a proposal by the orchestrators of Obamacare to forcibly vaccinate all adult Americans,” Hieb also ridiculed the Soviet-sounding “five-year plan” language. But the implications of the latest Obama administration attack on medical liberty and privacy are no joking matter.

“If you Americans do not stand against this, it’s over,” continued Dr. Hieb, author of the new book Surviving the Medical Meltdown: Your Guide to Living Through the Disaster of Obamacare. “What liberty do you have if the federal government can force you to have a medical procedure, can force you to surrender your very body to their control? Answer: none. Because there is nothing that cannot be justified on the basis of ‘the good of society.’ The Jewish Holocaust, the Great Leap Forward, the killing of the Kulaks, American Eugenics, Tuskegee experimentation, the cold water experiments of Birkenau, Dachau and Auschwitz, all were justified at the time by their respective leaders as for the good of society.”

In the WND column, Dr. Hieb also outlined some of her scientific concerns surrounding vaccination before lambasting the participation of government-selected “stakeholders” — state, local, territorial, and tribal governments; healthcare providers; advocacy groups; vaccine manufacturers; academia and research organizations; payers and health plans; employers; the military; and the general public. The “real stakeholder,” she said, “is you.” “No one cares more about the risks versus benefits of vaccination than you do personally,” Dr. Hieb concluded. “To leave it to a group, to treat you as a member of a group for medical care, is not ethical medicine. It is the stuff of jails and forced labor camps and socialist hellholes — and apparently American academia and bureaucrats. It is time to say no.”

Other experts and advocates for medical freedom were similarly outraged by the Obama administration’s adult-vaccination scheme. In a widely reprinted scathing report outlining the plan, Executive Director Theresa Wrangham with the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) urged citizens to fight back immediately. “There is no time to waste,” she wrote, citing a broad array of threats stemming from the HHS vaccine plot. From unconstitutionally invading Americans’ medical privacy to efforts at mandating adult vaccination and quashing informed-consent ethics in medicine, Wrangham said the plan is dangerous and must be opposed.

“The NAIP makes it clear that in the future, all American adults will be informed of the recommended adult schedule at every possible opportunity outside the healthcare provider domain,” explained Wrangham at the NVIC, a non-profit organization that supports informed consent and individual liberty. “You will be encouraged to comply with the adult schedule not only by your healthcare provider, but also via community-based partnerships to ensure that you have the opportunity to roll up your sleeve at work, school, church and other community gatherings.” The vaccine tracking databases being developed and already in existence, she added, “will be used to identify non-compliers.”

While the NVIC supports access to vaccines for anyone who wants them, there “is a difference between awareness, access, recommendations and mandates,” Wrangham continued. “In the past, these types of government vaccine use plans do not just seek to increase awareness and access but also make recommendations that foster vaccine mandates without flexible medical, religious and conscientious belief exemptions that align with the informed consent ethic.”

The scheme could eventually result in de facto mandatory vaccination, too. Vaccine mandates typically come from the state level, and the NAIP, technically at least, has no legal authority to make its “recommendations” mandatory. “However, much like the recommendations made by NVAC a few years ago for healthcare workers to receive annual flu shots, these recommendations are likely to result in future de facto vaccine mandates for adults, whether through employer requirements, or actual state laws,” Wrangham added, citing legislation introduced in states across the country this year to further chip away at existing exemptions — religious, medical, philosophical — for mandated childhood vaccines.

According to Wrangham, “there is little doubt that that the NVAC’s latest plan will result in similar actions to force adults to use all federally recommended vaccines.” In fact, as if that were not troubling enough, she also said, citing the work of Dr. Suzanne Humphries, “door-to-door efforts to make everyone comply” — as happened about a century ago — are “a real possibility again in America.” The difference is that this time, Americans could be forced to receive “a lot” of vaccines rather than just one.

“The noose being tightened around the necks of our children is being thrown over the necks of adults as well,” Wrangham said. “The tightening of that noose is growing daily in an attempt to strangle vaccine freedom of choice by eradicating the ethical principle of informed consent.” Blasting the “one-size-fits-all” vaccine schedule promoted by authorities as “very dangerous,” she noted that “the human right to protect bodily integrity and autonomy — the core value of the informed consent ethic — is at stake.” The battle is not between the pro- or anti-vaccine positions, she concluded. Instead, it is about freedom, values, beliefs, and what medical risks individuals are willing to accept. Vaccination just happens to be at the forefront of the battle.

Supporters of the plan, meanwhile, have rallied numerous establishment media outlets to their cause. Last month, for example, the Wall Street Journal ran an article that sounded almost like a press release issued by Obama’s HHS. “It’s Time for Grown-Ups to Get Their Shots,” reads the headline. The subtitle: “Adults have their own vaccination needs, but they’ve often been neglected. Now doctors are trying to correct that.” Those doctors, of course, are working in the federal bureaucracy or in crony companies, and their NAIP plot would, among other schemes, provide federal “incentives” to doctors that push more vaccines on patients. Numerous Big Business and special-interest “stakeholders” set to reap massive, risk-free profits from the federal scheming have also been touting it.

In addition to being a brazen assault on individual liberty, privacy, medical ethics, and the U.S. Constitution, the radical plan also represents the very essence of crony capitalism. The federal government, using non-existent “executive authorities,” is essentially seizing taxpayer funds from citizens to act as a coercive marketing and propaganda agency for hugely profitable Big Pharma companies and vaccine pushers. Adding insult to injury, those same crony capitalists successfully lobbied the federal government to shield them from liability when their products kill and injure consumers — making taxpayers bear the billions of dollars in costs for damages.

Various opponents of the ObamaVaccines plot for adults were urging concerned Americans to submit “public comments” to the federal bureaucrats at HHS begging them not to impose it. The public comment period ended last month, and bureaucrats will meet again in June to “finalize” their plans. A much better solution, though, would be for Congress to defund and abolish all unconstitutional agencies, bureaucracies, departments, and programs. If members of Congress would follow their oath of office, the NAIP and countless other totalitarian-minded schemes would never have even been dreamt up. Americans must stop trying to fight each individual executive-branch assault on liberty and instead go straight to the source: anti-constitutional congressional funding for all the madness.


Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. He can be reached at [email protected] . Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU.

Small Copter Lands On Capitol Lawn, Area On Lockdown (VIDEOS)

copter on capital hill lawn

Police arrested a man in front of the United States Capitol in Washington, DC on Wednesday afternoon after he landed a small gyrocopter on the west lawn of the building.

Eyewitnesses near the US Capitol saw police rush to a greenery on the east end of the National Mall early Wednesday afternoon after the craft landed. The pilot was apprehended at the scene.

3

Police have not yet identified the man, but the aircraft’s pilot is said to be 61-year-old Doug Hughes of Florida. According to a Tampa Bay Times profile of the man, published as his flight began on Wednesday, the event was meant to protest the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in the Citizens United case.

“The US Capitol Police is investigating a gyro copter with a single occupant that has landed on the grassy area of the West Lawn of t‎he US Capitol,” Capitol Police Lt. Kimberly Schneider said in a statement to CNN. “The US Capitol Police continues to investigate with one person detained and temporary street closures in the immediate area.”

The newspaper had published a profile about Hughes on account of his plans to “draw attention” to the Citizens United case in which the high court ruled that corporations can contribute endlessly to political causes.

“I’m not promoting myself,” Hughes told the paper prior to its publication. “I’m trying to direct millions of people to information, to a menu of organizations that are working together to fix Congress.”

2

According to the paper, Hughes had brought his gyrocopter from Florida to an area outside of DC late last week. On Wednesday, he planned to “to buzz through the air at 45 miles per hour at about 300 feet up in an ultralight gyrocopter toward Washington, D.C., toward protected airspace, where, if his plan works, he’ll land on the lawn of the United States Capitol building and deliver the mail,” journalist Ben Montgomery wrote.

“We’re heading full-throttle toward a breakdown,” Hughes told the paper of the Citizens United case. “There’s no question that we need government, but we don’t have to accept that it’s a corrupt government that sells out to the highest bidder. We can have a government that works for the people, that answers to the people, that can only take money from the people in small amounts.”

“I don’t believe that the authorities are going to shoot down a 61-year-old mailman in a flying bicycle,” Hughes told the paper. “I don’t have any defense, okay, but I don’t believe that anybody wants to personally take responsibility for the fallout.”

1

The Times described the gyrocopter as lightweight aircraft fitted with un-powered helicopter blades on top for lift and propeller on the back for thrust with a wide-open cockpit.

“This is as transparent a vehicle that I could come up with,” Hughes said. “You can literally see through it.”

Congressional staffers reported that the area was placed on lockdown on Wednesday as authorities rushed to apprehend the pilot and make sense of the scene. According to a local ABC News affiliate, the White House was also placed on lockdown as a precautionary measure.

Source: RT

 

US Government Targeted Second American Citizen For Assassination

Nobel-peace-drone-Obama

By: Andre Damon | RINF

A lead article in Monday’s New York Times describing a debate within the US government over whether to assassinate another American citizen brings into relief one basic fact: the United States is run by criminals.

The Times article revealed the name of an American citizen who had been placed on the so-called “kill list” for drone assassination. Due to a number of contingencies, the life of Texas-born Mohanad Mahmoud Al Farekh was ultimately spared. He was captured in a raid in Pakistan last year and was taken to the United States to face trial in Brooklyn, New York.

It has been known since 2010 that the Obama administration had decided to place at least one US citizen on its “kill list” of targets for drone assassination. This was Anwar al-Awlaki, who was assassinated in Yemen on September 30, 2011, many months later. The killing was a premeditated and unconstitutional act, targeting an individual who had not been charged, let alone convicted for any crime.

In a May 2013 speech at the National Defense University, President Barack Obama formally acknowledged the killing al-Awlaki, while also admitting that three other Americans had been killed as part of the “collateral damage” of other drone strikes. This included Awlaki’s teenage son one month after the killing of his father.

In February 2014, the Associated Press, citing “senior US officials,” reported that the White House was “wrestling with whether to kill [another US citizen] with a drone strike.” That man, unnamed at the time, was evidently Farekh.

Monday’s New York Times article makes clear that the life of Farekh was spared not because of any fundamental constitutional or democratic concerns, but rather as a result of tactical disagreements and jurisdictional conflicts among the agencies responsible for drone killings, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon and the Justice Department.

According to the Times, “The Pentagon nominated Mr. Farekh to be placed on a so-called kill list for terrorism suspects; CIA officials also pushed for the White House to authorize his killing. But the Justice Department, particularly Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., was skeptical of the intelligence dossier on Mr. Farekh.”

In other words, the decision against murdering Farekh was entirely a matter of expediency, based, according to the Times, on the belief by the Justice Department that his capture would better serve the purposes of American imperialism than his extrajudicial killing.

According to the Times piece, a major reason for not killing Farekh was the fact that he fell through the jurisdictional cracks between the Pentagon and the CIA in their operations inside Pakistan.

The Times writes that in 2013, “The White House directed that the Pentagon, rather than the CIA, should conduct lethal strikes against American citizens suspected of terrorism … But the Pentagon has long been banned from conducting drone strikes in Pakistan, part of a 2004 deal with Pakistan that all such attacks be carried out by the CIA under its authority to take covert action—allowing Pakistan to publicly deny any knowledge of the strikes and American officials to remain silent.”

Between 2004 and 2015, the US killed as many as 3,949 people through drone strikes in Pakistan alone, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

Top administration officials are well aware that what they are doing is illegal and unconstitutional, particularly in relation to US citizens. One unnamed “former senior official” told the Times that “Post-Awlaki, there was a lot of nervousness” about killing American citizens, reflecting the very real awareness in the Obama administration that its actions could leave it open for prosecution in the future.

Whatever these concerns, however, the Obama administration, along with the entire political establishment, has vigorously defended the right of the president to assassinate US citizens without due process.

Tellingly, the Times reported that congressional leaders functioned not as a restraint and a check on the criminal actions of the White House and CIA, but rather sought to goad the White House to murder Farekh. The article states, “During a closed-door hearing of the House Intelligence Committee in July 2013, lawmakers grilled military and intelligence officials about why Mr. Farekh had not been killed.”

In February 2013, Attorney General Holder made clear that the administration claims its right to extrajudicially assassinate US citizens, even within the borders of the United States.

Holder wrote in a letter to Senator Rand Paul: “It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.”

In his May 2013 speech, Obama reinforced his commitment to the drone murder program, declaring, “America’s actions are legal … We were attacked on 9/11. Within a week, Congress overwhelmingly authorized the use of force.”

Obama then declared, seemingly contradicting himself, “For the record, I do not believe it would be constitutional for the government to target and kill any US citizen—with a drone or with a shotgun—without due process.”

This statement revolves around a crude verbal sophistry. In 2012, Attorney General Holder argued that the Constitution’s declaration that no person shall “be deprived of life … without due process of law” did not specify judicial process, but rather could apply to the internal deliberations within the executive branch.

As a result, the administration argued, the types of negotiations between cabinet officials, intelligence agencies and allied governments chronicled in Monday’s Times piece qualify as “due process.”

The Times article on Farekh was certainly cleared with the Obama administration and US intelligence agencies before being published. This may indicate that the turf battles described in it continue, and the article is part of ongoing maneuvers between the military and intelligence agencies of the US state apparatus.

The article is also part of a process of legitimizing and normalizing the clearly illegal and impeachable offenses described. In June of last year, the Obama administration released the drone murder memo outlining is pseudo-legal rationale for killing US citizens. Neither the memo not the crimes it outlined produced any significant objection from within the state or media establishment, the representatives and spokesmen of the corporate and financial aristocracy in America.

 

 

You Vs. The World (VIDEO)

one-versus-the-world-chess

Time to choose: individual freedom or collective tyranny. We will focus on what we can do at the individual level to become our highest and best self while others keep looking for a collective solution run by cunning men that weave fantasies for the willing.


Chris Duane

Best Government – Governs Least

thomas jefferson government

Once upon a time the Founding Fathers were considered to be the personification of the American Republic. Most notable among giants, was Thomas Jefferson. The significance of his authorship of the Declaration of Independence is heralded as the very essence of the purpose for fighting the revolution. Jump onward to the present era and examine the sentiment held by the populace. The seeming disconnect from the political thought of the 18th and 19th century to the attitudes in this 21st totalitarian collectivist mindset that dominates the culture, often resembles life on a different planet. 

According to Monticell.org, the quintessential statement closely associated with Jefferson, “That government is best which governs least” is clarified. 

“Although the ideas expressed in this quotation may be in line with Jefferson’s opinions to some extent, the exact phrasing is almost certainly not Jefferson’s.  However, this quotation has been associated with the ideological descendants of Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican party for a very long time, and this is likely why it ultimately came to be attributed to him.  Merrill Peterson even referred to the quotation as a “Jeffersonian maxim” in The Jefferson Image in the American Mind”. 

It can be fairly accepted that this world view was commonly acknowledged as the norm for most Americans. During the formative years of nation building, the proper role of government was narrow in scope. At a minimum, the civic culture professed a need and desire to keep government intervention limited on all levels.  

National Affairs proposes in the article, The Art of Limited Government a new standard. 

“What guidelines could preserve Jefferson’s ethos while also recognizing that the world has changed in dramatic ways? A good place for conservatives to start might be Friedrich Hayek’s The Constitution of Liberty, in which he sanctioned two spheres of domestic activity as legitimately belonging to government: offering a minimal social safety net and providing limited correction for failures of the market. Neither of these two roles, Hayek believed, was inherently incompatible with economic freedom or the rule of law.” 

In the same vein, Peter Coulson from Australia writes in the article, the best Government is that which governs least.  

“This is the central premise of libertarian political theory and is designed for two main aims. Firstly it protects the rights and liberties from a government pursuing a course of action that requires coercion of the public to achieve its desired outcomes.

The second reason for this theory is the belief that government should “focus on its knitting”: providing a stable economic management framework, with robust and predictable rules within which the market can effectively operate to create wealth for its participants.” 

The premise that official authorities operate on, the precept for the “Good of Society” has little in common with the actual conduct of government policy. In addition, the public has abandoned the quest for individual liberty in their pursuit for the good life at the expense of their neighbor. 

Political Crumbs starts out with the statement: We’ve moved a long way since Locke’s minimal vision of government, then goes on to express the fantasy myth of achieving a “Good Society”. 

“Indeed, we widely regard it as an urgent moral task of the government to guarantee a minimum quality of life for all of its citizens. Where to draw that “minimal” line is a matter of debate, but few would argue about clean drinking water, free firefighters, free hospitals, free sewage treatment plants, free schooling for children…all this is something the government of a rich state ought to, at the very least, guarantee its citizens.” 

The absurdity that it is government’s role, or even its duty to provide FREE services, exemplifies the mental illness that underpins the general decay in societal attitudes and the lack of rational thought. Government is hardly free. The notion that social programs are a moral imperative, when government never produces any wealth or monetary value, by the very nature of its composition stands on the self-evident premise, that the state derives its cash flow from coercive confiscation under the penalty of punitive laws and regulations. 

Even the notion that “so called” responsible citizens would not debate, much less rebuke the collectivist civic benefit of government fluoride poisoned water, mandated  taxable fire fighting fees and government school socialization indoctrination, or the death panels that provide their euthanasia care are all symptoms of deranged Utopian insanity. The real sewer treatment plant is the governmental apparatus that seeks to dominate every facet of individual life. 

Absent in the state worship culture is any admission that the state has failed miserably under the tyranny of governmental imposition for well over the last century and a half. Material consumerism and socialist programs are no substitute for personal dignity and individual responsibility. 

Quality of life is directly proportional with the degree of the absence of government intrusion in the lives of citizens. By this standard, we all live under the dictatorship of a system designed to dehumanize, impose dependency and demand ultimate deference to a despotic and authoritarian system. 

Well prior to the inception of the country, the model of a direct form of democracy, embodied in the Town Hall Meeting provided for participatory community decision making. Author Frank M. Bryan of the book, Real Democracy: The New England Town Meeting and How It Works notes. 

“Town meetings have suffered a loss in attendance over the years. Most of this decline can be attributed to increases in town size, which explains about 60% of the variance in attendance from town to town. But a decline in the number and variety of issues over which towns have control has deprived townspeople of the opportunity to make decisions that matter in their lives. That has hurt attendance dramatically.” 

While rule by direct democracy certainly conflicts with our Republic representational form of Federalism, the tradition of local citizen’s involvement in local government is a mainstay for a free people. Yes, the size of the community directly marginalizes the effectiveness of a single person; however, the message of a lone voice often is more powerful than the goon squads of a police state. Of course, a moral citizenry is the indispensable ingredient necessary to stand up to tyranny. 

As previously cited in the essay, The TUN – a true representative council provides the proper alternative to the current version of electoral office selections in the land of the timid. Read the details of this method of representation and accept the conclusion that “By applying the prudent principles of the TUN method, a real representative republic is possible. Consider a model that retains the current levels of government separations that exist today.”

Now for any form of government to justly administer and honor individual natural rights must be based upon the willful consent of responsible citizens. In today’s environment, the requirement that the people will discipline themselves is not exactly a widespread practice. Even if the multitude would accept the principle, very few have the internal strength to reject or shun the “FREE” cradle to grave government welfare society.  

The leap from innately knowing that less government produces more freedom just does not motivate the captured masses from resisting all those social benefits from the “Free Lunch”.  

In a report entitled, What Americans REALLY Think about Government, the conclusions sadly indicate how the public has sunk to the low view of their own obligations. 

“Surveys also reveal that surprisingly large numbers of people believe that the government should take the lead and be responsible for dealing with a wide variety of social and economic problems. 71% of Americans believe that the government has an important or essential responsibility for seeing to it that anyone who wants a job can have one. 63% believe that the government has an important or essential responsibility to provide citizens with adequate housing; and 78% of us think that the government has an important or essential responsibility to provide citizens with good medical care. Similarly large majorities strongly support the notion that it is the responsibility of the public sector to “guarantee a quality public education,” “protect the environment,” and “ensure equal opportunity for everyone.” 

Such attitudes are typical of those non-participates to the actual functions of governmental administration. Only job seekers, bureaucratic careerists, political aspirants or “PC” collectivists will ignore the true record of government incompetency, deliberate corruption and misguided expenditures that bloat budgets to the point of impoverishing the once prosperous Middle America.  

The National Center for Constitutional Studies sums up the plight of the lost Republic with a quote from Alexis de Tocqueville. “Democracy in the United States will endure until those in power learn that they can perpetuate themselves through taxation.” 

Dismissing the harm that irresponsible citizens have caused with their destructive demands for more government bennies, paid for by others or just pushed onto future generations, allows for the culture of State repression. The principles embodied in the TUN framework are a solution and remedy to the psychosis of Big Government.

“It is not true that that government is best which is best administered — it is a sophism invented by tyranny to quiet the inquisitive mind; a good administration is at best but a temporary palliative to a bad government, but it does not alter its nature.” –   William Penn


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 http://batr.org.

What Would Happen If Martial Law Was Declared In America?

obama hitler

In recent weeks, there has been a lot of concern that an upcoming eight week military exercise on U.S. soil known as “Jade Helm” is actually a dress rehearsal for the imposition of martial law in this country.  One of the reasons for the high level of concern is that we have seen a dramatic increase in the number of “urban warfare exercises” conducted by the U.S. military in major U.S. cities over the past decade – including exercises where “dissidents” are hunted down, arrested and hauled away.  As our world becomes increasingly unstable, and as our society rapidly decays from within, many believe that it is only a matter of time before the executive branch will have sufficient excuse to use the extensive martial law powers that it has been accumulating since 9/11.  When that day arrives, what will our nation look like?  What would actually happen if martial law was declared in America?

Well, the first thing that you need to know is that the U.S. Constitution would be “suspended”.

In other words, you would suddenly have no rights at all.

There would be no freedom of speech, no freedom of the press, no freedom of assembly and you could be arrested at any time for any reason whatsoever.

For the duration of the “emergency”, the military would be in control.  There would be troops in the streets, a curfew would almost certainly be imposed, and armed checkpoints would be set up.

If the “emergency” lasted long enough, we would probably see authorities go house to house confiscating firearms, ammunition and food supplies.

And perhaps most troubling of all, “dissidents” and “subversives” would likely be rounded up and imprisoned.

Perhaps you don’t think that this could ever happen in the United States in 2015.

Well, we do know that this is precisely what the FBI had a plan to do in the 1950s.  The following is an excerpt from a recent RT article

Documents show the FBI created a “Plan C” during the Cold War, which could have been triggered in the event the US underwent a nuclear attack. It included putting the nation under martial law, rounding up “subversives,” and interning enemy diplomats.

The documents, acquired by transparency journalism organization MuckRock, detail the FBI plan created in 1956, which was shared with several top officials from every governmental department. The FBI also distributed papers regarding the plan to its field offices. The plan would have gone into effect “after a war has begun in which the US is involved or may become involved and prior to an actual attack on the US itself,” according to the documents.

Under Plan C, martial law would be declared and the FBI would enact its ‘Emergency Detention Program,’ which entailed apprehending individuals whose affiliations with subversive organizations “are so pronounced that their continued liberty in the event of a national emergency would present a serious threat to the internal security of the country.” The document shows that as of April 1956, almost 13,000 people “were scheduled for apprehension in an emergency.”

Very sobering.

And we do know that the federal government had a list of at least 8 million names of people that were considered to be “threats to national security” back in the 1980s.  This list was known as Main Core, and it is not known whether this list still exists today.

I have a feeling that it does, and that it is probably much larger than it was back then.

We also know that government documents produced during the Obama administration openly discuss rounding up “dissidents” and taking them to internment camps.  Just consider the following example from Infowars

A leaked 2012 US Army Military Police training manual, entitled “Civil Disturbance Operations,” described how soldiers would be ordered to confiscate firearms and kill American “dissidents.” The manual also revealed that prisoners would be detained in temporary internment camps and “re-educated” to gain a new appreciation of “U.S. policies,” in accordance with U.S. Army FM 3-19.40 Internment/Resettlement Operations.

So who would those “dissidents” be exactly?

In “72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered ‘Potential Terrorists’ In Official Government Documents“, I detailed how official U.S. government documents specifically identify those that believe in “conspiracy theories” as possible threats.  Others that the government is concerned about include those opposed to abortion, globalism, communism, illegal immigration, the United Nations and “the New World Order”.

I wish that none of this was true.  Go check out the article for yourself.

Another very disturbing government document talks about the need for the U.S. Army to prepare to battle political dissidents in “megacities” and to neutralize groups “who can influence the lives of the population while undermining the authority of the state”.  Here is more from Infowars

The U.S. Army is preparing to fight political dissidents who challenge the power of the state as “megacities” become the battleground of the future, according to a new report in the Army Times.

The article details how the Army’s Capabilities Integration Center (ARCIC) worked with US Army Special Operations Command, the chief of staff’s Strategic Studies Group and the UK’s Ministry of Defence earlier this year to wargame the future of armed combat, which will revolve around the neutralization of groups “who can influence the lives of the population while undermining the authority of the state,” a chillingly vague description which could easily be applied to political dissidents.

The plan foresees an unprecedented realignment of U.S. military strategy focused around putting “boots on the ground” in megacities to deal with “politically dispossessed” populations while relying on “more lethal and more autonomous” methods.

Very alarming stuff.

And if we did see martial law declared nationwide, it is likely that all elections would be suspended indefinitely.

That could also potentially include the 2016 presidential election.

Is it possible that Barack Obama could use his emergency powers to stay in the White House beyond his second term?  There are some out there that believe that this could actually happen under the right circumstances.  For example, check out what Dr. Ben Carson said during an appearance on the Alan Colmes radio show

COLMES: What do you mean though when you say there may not be an election in 2016?

DR. BEN CARSON: There may be so much anarchy going on.

COLMES: Anarchy? So you really think we risk risking an anarchic America to the point where elections might be put on hold, or some kind of emergency is declared with such anarchy that there wouldn’t be a Presidential election in a couple of years?

DR. BEN CARSON: I don’t want to find out. I really don’t want to find out, I don’t want to continue down this pathway that we’re going down.

And the groundwork has certainly been laid for such a scenario.

During his time in the White House, Barack Obama has signed a series of executive orders that give him and his minions an extraordinary amount of power in the event of a major national emergency.

For example, read the following excerpt from an executive order that Obama signed in March 2012

Sec. 201.  Priorities and Allocations Authorities.  (a)  The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:

(1)  the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2)  the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3)  the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4)  the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5)  the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6)  the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

That sounds like it covers just about everything.

Basically, during a time of martial law all of the things that you take for granted today would be out the window.

You would have no rights, and the federal government would be able to do just about anything that it wanted to do.

If that sounds really bad to you, then maybe now you are starting to understand why so many people get upset when they see preparations being made for the eventual imposition of martial law in this country.


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 Amazon.com.

If You Don’t Think Obama Will Send Americans To FEMA Camps, Then Listen To This Former FBI Agent (VIDEO)

Bill Ayers Mug Shot

Bill Ayers Mug Shot. This terrorist helped to launch Obama’s political career from his Hyde Park Chicago home.

The Weathermen Underground Leader, Bill Ayers, told former FBI Agent’Informant, and my late friend, Larry Grathwohl, that he believed that when the Communist takeover happened, he would have to incarcerate 50 million Americans into re-education camps and exterminate 25 million of them. Larry was an FBI special informant who had penetrated the Underground.

Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dorne, launched Obama’s political career from the living room of their Chicago home. Tom Ayers, Bill’s father, funded Obama’s Harvard education. This information also appears in an affidavit obtained by “Sheriff Joe” Arpaio from Maricopa County, AZ.  Bill Ayers still visits the White House.

Nobody would believe these facts in a movie. However, you better believe that this administration will not hesitate to send any of us to a  FEMA camp and the intent is well documented. The reasons for the implementation of the NDAA, indefinite detention of Americans without due process of law, should be readily apparent.

Larry Grathwohl repeated these allegations, three times, on The Common Sense Show. Here is video summation.

DOES JADE HELM MATTER NOW?


Dave Hodges is the host of the popular weekly talk show, The Common Sense Show, which airs on Sunday nights from 9pm – Midnight (central) on the Republic Broadcasting Network and its 29 affiliate stations. Dave also hosts a website (www.thecommonsenseshow.com) in which he writes daily articles on the geopolitical state of affairs both nationally and internationally. The theme of Dave’s show and website centers around exposing the corruption and treason which has invaded the presidency and Congress as well as their corporate and banking benefactors. Dave is an award winning psychology, sociology, statistics and research professor. He is also a former college basketball coach who retired as the winningest coach in his college’s history. A mental health therapist by training, Dave brings a broad based perspective in his fight against the corrupt central banking cartels which have hijacked the US government. Dave and his wife, Nora have one son and they presently reside in rural Arizona approximately 25 miles north of the greater Phoenix area. Dave was drawn to the fight for freedom when the globalist central banking forces, led by Senator John McCain, attempted to seize his home and property and that of 300 of his neighbors, without one dime being offered in compensation. This attempted public theft of private property was conducted for the purpose of securing cheap land in which the globalists intended on putting in an international highway through their area known as the Canamex Corridor. Dave’s community appointed him the spokesperson and eventually his community won their fight against the bankers and their front man, Senator McCain. This event launched Dave’s career as a broadcaster and an investigative journalist. Dave’s website presently enjoys over a half a million visitors every month.

 

Colorado Bill Would Impose $15,000 Fine On Cops Who Try To Stop People From Filming Them

film the police
By: Poor Richard’s News

This law is much needed.  How many videos have we seen of police threatening citizens who film them and lying about it being illegal?

from ABC 7  Denver:

A package of police oversight bills introduced in the Colorado Legislature includes a measure that would impose up to $15,000 in civil penalties if a law enforcement officer seizes or destroys a citizen’s recording or interferes with someone trying to film them.

“Primarily, it came up as a result of the number of news reports we’ve been seeing about police officers telling people, ‘Give me your camera,’ or taking the data away, and that is unacceptable conduct,” said Rep. Joe Salazar, a Democrat from Thornton and co-sponsor of the bill.

Salazar said House Bill 15-1290 has support from both Democrats and Republicans, and is not intended to penalize police.

“It takes a very special person to be a police officer,” Salazar said. “We want to honor them, but at the same time, we have a few bad apples who need to be aware that their conduct now has major, major consequences.”

Salazar said one incident that caught his attention was a woman’s claims that Denver Police prevented her daughter from filming what happened after Jessica Hernandez, a 17-year-old in a stolen car, was shot.

Bobbie Ann Diaz lives right in front of the Park Hill ally where it happened in January. One of her daughter’s was in the car with Hernandez and another daughter, Brianna, came outside with Diaz after they heard the gunshots.

Diaz said an officer stopped her after she left her yard, telling her he would arrest her if she didn’t cooperate.

“The officer had me apprehended, he wouldn’t let me go,” Diaz said.
She said she yelled to Brianna, who was still on their property, behind a fence, to record what was happening as officers pulled a lifeless Hernandez from the car.

“At that time, (the officers) put Jessie down and they were on their knees yelling at Brianna that she better not record. She better not,” Diaz said. “She got scared. She got intimated. These are big officers and she didn’t want to make things worse.”

Diaz said, at that time, she wasn’t aware that citizens have every right to record police as long as they are not interfering with an investigation.

“I wanted to cooperate with them,” she said. “And I didn’t know it was our right to keep recording on our property.”

read the rest

This is an idea that needs to catch on in all 50 states.

Not only that, but police in every precinct in America should be required to wear vest-cameras at all times.

Your Pastor Knows When Martial Law Will Be Rolled Out

jh-15-ft-lauderdale-1024x576

Is this roundup taking place in China, Iran or Russia? As many already know, this recently took place in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida in which “pretend” dissidents are rounded up as part of the Jade Helm 15 drill. Please note the straight line and the hands on the shoulders of those in front of them, as they were swept away to waiting white vans. We are witnessing the implementation of the Fourth Reich.

jh-15-white-vans

I think it is logical to assume that Jade Helm 15 will go live and it is a martial law extraction of dissidents exercise to be followed by full scale martial law. I have received many inquiries about when I believe martial law will be declared. Despite all the documentation and anecdotal evidence, on my own, I am not able to precisely determine the time of the implementation of martial law on the streets of America.

Even though it is not possible to know the date, without the information leaking from the inside, I do believe that there are “the chest pains before the heart attack”, which will provide the clues necessary to determine when martial law will be imposed.

Your Pastor Will Know the Date of Martial Law Implementation

Many people in the independent media have reported that an estimated 28,000 pastors were recruited by FEMA/DHS, as part of the Clergy Response Team, and that their initial and primary training was to tell their flock to obey the DHS version of Romans 13. Romans 13, in the King James version of the Bible, begins:

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” Romans 13:1

Many of us have been quick to point out that this bastardization of the Romans 13 is designed to force compliance to government edicts who might not otherwise comply. Certainly all governments are not established by God. Were the governments of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, all ordained by God? What about George the III?

All of Pastor Mansfield’s revelations stem from legislation known as, The National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 which mandates the establishment of “national emergency centers” to be located on military installations for the purpose of providing “temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to the bill.

The legislation also states that the camps will be used to “provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations”. Hence, the birth of NOVAD and the Clergy Response Teams.

The bill also provides that the camps can be used to “meet other appropriate needs”, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security. This is a carte blanche mandate that many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting following a national emergency or a total economic collapse.

An HR 645 creation which will meet the criteria for “any other appropriate needs”.

An HR 645 creation which will meet the criteria for “any other appropriate needs”.

Pastor Mansfield’s Clergy Response Team Training Is Very Telling

Pastor Mansfield attended several briefings and he could barely believe his ears. He learned of the government’s plan to enact martial law as well as to implement forced population relocations. Mansfield emphasized that when martial law is enacted, the enforcement would be immediate. In other words, family members will be separated from each other and part of the training that the clergy received was how to comfort separated family members. It doesn’t take much imagination to conclude that this is what we are seeing from the horrifying images from Ft. Lauderdale and the Death Domes throughout Texas.

Pastor Mansfield told me that the pastors were trained by FEMA to go to homes where people refused to be relocated by the authorities and their immediate job was to convince the reluctant to willingly go to the relocation camps. Ostensibly, this was to be done in lieu of sending in the SWAT teams.

I asked Mansfield if FEMA camps were real and he stated that much of the clergy training focused around this scenario of pastors operating within the forced relocation centers. The main goal of a pastor assigned was to bring order and encourage compliance with DHS requests, hence, the emphasis on Romans 13.

Disturbingly, Pastor Mansfield reiterated several times that the number one job of these pastors is to calm down the detainees and encourage their compliance within the people’s new surroundings.

Pastor Mansfield also stated that pastors will be utilized as informants. This violates the legal privilege of confidentiality between pastor and church-goer, that is currently recognized by law. All church-goers can no longer trust the sanctity of personal confessions and revelations made to pastors and priests. This one illegal act by DHS completely undermines the Christian Church in America!

DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE CLERGY RESPONSE TEAM WILL BE UTILIZED IN THE EXTRACTION PROCESS OF AMERICANS, TO FORCED INTERNMENT/RESETTLEMENT CAMPS, THESE “TEAM” MEMBERS REPRESENT THE BEST CLUE WE HAVE AS TO WHEN MARTIAL LAW WILL BE CARRIED OUT. 

I strongly suspect that the Clergy Response Teams are a part of Jade Helm 15 and simply listed as DHS personnel. With a minimum of 28,000 pastors being a part of this dastardly plan, we need to all put our pastors under our watchful eye. Is your Pastor disappearing for unexplained periods of time? Network with people you know from other churches. Are your respective Pastors disappearing at the same time? Can you account for your Pastor’s travels? This past weekend, at Baylor University, Christians from all over the Southwest came together at Baylor’s football stadium for fellowship at an event referred to as the “Gathering“. Given the political climate in Texas, I am a little more than suspicious that this event did not bring together several Clergy Response Team members for additional training under NOVAD. Again, we need to be putting our Pastors under scrutiny because we have 28,000 Judases in our midst.

Clergy Response Team Members Are Intimidated and Threatened by DHS

Mansfield told me that the pastors in America are being coerced to participate because when an emergency is declared, no pastor, who does not have the “FEMA-trained government badge” will be allowed to be in a declared “emergency” SAFE area.

Pastor Mansfield also felt very strongly this was the government’s way of removing Jesus from America’s landscape and set the stage for the ushering in of a new-age religion. In fact, Mansfield shared with me documentation which demonstrated DHS’s attempt to remove Jesus from the entire internment/resettlement process.

The pastors were told not to quote Scripture. The DHS document which was prepared for the pastors clearly stated that Scripture had been used to “oppress” people in the past and the presenters strongly discouraged its use. Please see the following excerpt from one of the DHS training manuals: 

Healing Scripture and Prayer In the Pastoral Crisis Intervention 

“During a time of crisis people do go through a  “crisis of faith.”

Sometime quick mention of God and scripture may not be helpful. As we all know the Scripture has been used to oppress, dominate and at the same time used for healing and reconciliation- renewing of relationship with God and people. If the pastor senses it is appropriate to use the scripture and prayer, it must carefully be done for healing of victims not to uphold pastoral authority.” (Page 14)  

In other words, all legitimate pastoral authority was abrogated by the pastors who participated in the roundup of American citizens.

Also on page 14 of the same training document, pastors were admonished to avoid“Unhealthy God talk….” Specifically pastors are ordered to avoid using references to God when helping people cope with the loss of a loved one:

        “4. God must have needed him/her more than you.”

        “5. God never gives more than we can handle.

Conclusion

Doesn’t this strike you as odd? DHS recruits Pastors but will not let them preach the Word of God? Can we think of anyone or anything else that might support this goal? Please allow me to provide another hint:

What does “Master the human domain” mean? Is it a euphemism for the complete subjugation of the civilian population of the United States? JH 15 is our version of the Reichstag fire and the “Night of the broken glass” event all rolled into one.

What does “Master the human domain” mean? Is it a euphemism for the complete subjugation of the civilian population of the United States? JH 15 is our version of the Reichstag fire and the “Night of the broken glass” event all rolled into one.

The artwork of Jade Helm 15 is bizarre and troubling. Please note the broken arrows. In military parlance, broken arrow means that a military unit’s perimeter has been overrun and defeat imminent. The meaning here is easy to extrapolate.

Originally, I was stumped by the phrase that accompanied the symbol for Jade Helm 15, “Master the Human Domain”. This is not a phrase that is in our American colloquialisms. On the surface, it appears to mean that this drill is about the enslavement of humanity? Certainly, the Obama administration would not be so bold, even if this was their intent, to so brazenly put this phrase as moniker for a major operation. Wouldn’t that alert the public that something evil was afoot? Or, has this plot gone so far that they do not care?

Upon closer examination, the fact that the term “Human Domain” is used, it makes me wonder what would the “Un-Human Domain” consist of? And certainly the word “Master” does strongly imply slavery. And who is unhuman enough to be interested in enslaving humanity? The only possible answer is the Prince of Darkness. There is no other way to interpret this moniker for Jade Helm 15.

Now we know who the real enemy is. We also know that this rapture in reverse (i.e. “disappearing Pastors”) is a warning sign of impending martial law, the question remains, what are we going to do about it?


Dave Hodges is the host of the popular weekly talk show, The Common Sense Show, which airs on Sunday nights from 9pm – Midnight (central) on the Republic Broadcasting Network and its 29 affiliate stations. Dave also hosts a website (www.thecommonsenseshow.com) in which he writes daily articles on the geopolitical state of affairs both nationally and internationally. The theme of Dave’s show and website centers around exposing the corruption and treason which has invaded the presidency and Congress as well as their corporate and banking benefactors. Dave is an award winning psychology, sociology, statistics and research professor. He is also a former college basketball coach who retired as the winningest coach in his college’s history. A mental health therapist by training, Dave brings a broad based perspective in his fight against the corrupt central banking cartels which have hijacked the US government. Dave and his wife, Nora have one son and they presently reside in rural Arizona approximately 25 miles north of the greater Phoenix area. Dave was drawn to the fight for freedom when the globalist central banking forces, led by Senator John McCain, attempted to seize his home and property and that of 300 of his neighbors, without one dime being offered in compensation. This attempted public theft of private property was conducted for the purpose of securing cheap land in which the globalists intended on putting in an international highway through their area known as the Canamex Corridor. Dave’s community appointed him the spokesperson and eventually his community won their fight against the bankers and their front man, Senator McCain. This event launched Dave’s career as a broadcaster and an investigative journalist. Dave’s website presently enjoys over a half a million visitors every month.

 

9/11 Commission Report Instructs FBI To Step Up Fake Terror Plots

FBI Joins Malaysia Inquiry as Deleted Simulator Data Sought
By: Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com

Report appears as agency visits Capitol Hill to defend an $8.48 billion budget request.

On Wednesday the FBI released a final report to the 9/11 Review Commission. “I am pleased the Review Commission recognized the significant progress we have made to build a threat-based, intelligence-driven law enforcement and national security organization,” said FBI Director James B. Comey.

It states the FBI must concentrate on sharing information with other law enforcement agencies and the government at a time of emerging new threats such as the Islamic State and the flow of Westerners joining militant fighters in Syria, according to the Associated Press.

“These threats are not just knocking on the door. They’re in the room,” said former Rep. Timothy Roemer, a member of the original 9/11 commission. Edwin Meese, a former Attorney General under Reagan, is also a member of the commission.

Information sharing, according to the commissioners, has helped prevent “another catastrophic terrorist attack.” The report argues the agency must concentrate on building human intelligence programs.

Human Intelligence, or HUMINT, is intelligence collected through interpersonal contact as opposed to signals intelligence. Its methodology was developed by the U.S. military and relies on interviews and interrogation.

The FBI “has assigned analysts, including reports officers, and human intelligence (HUMINT) collectors to the field. It has introduced a well-conceived, entity-wide threat prioritization process,” according to the report.

Interrogating Suspects to Death and Inventing Terror Plots

In 2014, the FBI sent human intelligence collectors to interrogate Ibragim Todashev, said to be a friend of suspected Boston Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was reportedly killed by the police during a shoot-out. The interview resulted in FBI agents shooting Todashev to death.

Khasuen Taramov, a friend of Todashev, told CNN affiliate Florida News 13 that prior to the shooting Todashev told him he felt “like there’s going to be a setup … bad setup against him. Because he told me, ‘They are making up such crazy stuff, I don’t know … why they doing it. OK, I’m answering the questions, but they are still making up some, like, connections, some crazy stuff. I don’t know why they are doing it.’ ”

FBI interrogations are geared toward forcing suspects to make false statements and then prosecuting then. The tactic is used when the FBI does not have enough evidence to get a conviction.

“In post-9/11, the FBI famously went to what they call the ‘Al Capone’ strategy, in which they were going to prosecute people they suspected of terrorism for anything they could find,” Mike German, a former FBI agent and current fellow at New York University’s School of Law, told Vocativ. “That’s fine if they guess right and are going after terrorists, but I found in my law enforcement career that often when you couldn’t prove somebody was a terrorist, it was because they weren’t a terrorist.”

In addition to harassing and intimidating supposed terror suspects and, in the case of Todashev, killing them, the FBI is notorious for creating terror plots which are then used to push the war on terror narrative in the corporate media.

A report released by Mother Jones and the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California-Berkley concludes the FBI is responsible for creating most terror plots in the United States.

The FBI “has made a business of approaching likely candidates and grooming them to carry out terror attacks,” writes Tony Cartalucci.

The implications are of course, with the FBI’s current nationwide stable of patsies being trained, directed, and provided material support to carry out attacks the FBI then “foils,” is at any given moment, any one of these operations can be switched “live” just as in 1993. The resulting carnage can then be used to manipulate public opinion just as it was in 1993, 2001, on 7/7 in London, and in Madrid, Spain in 2004.

“Americans have been told that their government is keeping them safe by preventing and prosecuting terrorism inside the US,” Andrea Prasow, deputy Washington director at Human Rights Watch, noted in a report issued by Human Rights Watch and Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Institute. “But take a closer look and you realize that many of these people would never have committed a crime if not for law enforcement encouraging, pressuring, and sometimes paying them to commit terrorist acts.”

The FBI and the Justice Department are immune to criticism and continue to defend the FBI tactic of inventing terror and coercing often mentally unstable individuals into imaginary terror plots.

“These operations are conducted with extraordinary care and precision, ensuring that law enforcement officials are accountable for the steps they take — and that suspects are neither entrapped nor denied legal protections,” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in July, 2014. He said FBI undercover operations are “essential in fighting terrorism.”

The commission report directs the FBI to expand its current operations and produce more suspicious terror plots which will then be exploited by an ongoing propaganda campaign to convince the American people they face a serious international terror threat and increasingly threats posed by lone wolves radicalized by fanatical Muslims at home.

Propaganda and the specter of lone wolves lurking in the shadows — lone wolves and terrorists conceived by the FBI domestically and the CIA abroad — are essential if the state is going to maintain its war of terror and realize its political goals at home — an all-encompassing high-tech police state — and internationally: fighting manufactured and illusory enemies that permit the extension of a corporate empire into vital geostrategic regions, particularly the Middle East and Africa.