Home

The Trans-Pacific Partnership, Slavery, the AME Massacre and the Emancipation Proclamation:

3 Comments

 
Duty to Warn

new logokohlsBy Gary G. Kohls, MD

If the TPP had been the Law of the Land for the past 150 years, Slavery Would Still be Legal

 

“The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a global corporate noose around U.S. local, state, and national sovereignty – narrowly passed a major procedural hurdle in the Congress by gaining “fast track” status. … “fast track” is a euphemism for your members of Congress … handcuffing themselves, so as to prevent any amendments or adequate debate before the final vote … TPP is another euphemism that is used to avoid the word “treaty”, which would require ratification by two-thirds of the Senate.”

“The corporate-indentured politicians keep calling this gigantic treaty with thirty chapters, of which only five relate to traditional trade issues…. The other twenty-five chapters, if passed as they are, will have serious impacts on your livelihoods as workers and consumers, as well as your air, water, food, and medicines.

“Only corporations … are entitled to sue the U.S. government for any alleged harm to their profits from health, safety or other regulations in secret tribunals that operate as offshore kangaroo courts, not in open courts.” Ralph Nader 

Last week was a landmark week for President Obama and his administration. It was so important that last Friday’s PBS Washington Week program couldn’t find room for the slightest mention of what is arguably the most disastrous and most secretive anti-democracy, pro-corporate legislation since the Patriot Act and Homeland Security Acts were passed at the beginning of the late, lamented Cheney/Bush administration. Similarly – and astonishingly – nobody in the 2001 Congress actually read either of those bills (except for Ohio Democratic House member Dennis Kucinich); and, soberingly, the same is true of the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s fast-track legislation. So congressional members are relying on what the lobbyists are telling them about TPP and again, shamefully voting on something that they haven’t read!

Washington Week only had space for the Supreme Court’s legalizing same-gender marriage, Obamacare, the massacre in Charleston and Obama’s powerful eulogy there.

As important and newsworthy as those items were, not a word was mentioned about what might have been the most important and onerous development in DC, the progress of the secretive, anti-democratic, pro-corporate legislation, the TPP.

Fair-minded, critical thinking, wide-awake persons who are capable of changing their minds when new information is revealed to them (AKA, resistance to cognitive dissonance) have come to understand that anything that happens in the ‘hallowed halls” of the Global Corporate Congress in DC is bad news for democracy, the middle class, the working class and the poor and good news for democracy’s amoral enemies in the multinational corporations, the Pentagon, the war industries and the national security state apparatus..

Any time that the “dirty trick” gridlock masters in the GOP (exemplified so well by the evil visages of Republican House Majority Leader John Boehner, Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and 1840s-era Senator John C. Calhoun) can get the equally co-opted, pro-corporate Democrats to agree to any major legislation (such as going to war), you will know that workers, consumers and democracy – are all going to get screwed.

The euphemistically-labeled TPP is a late Obama administration payback to investors (AKA “return on investment”). Obama’s campaigns were heavily funded by Wall Street, Big Banks, Big Pharma and multinational corporations, and it is now payback time.

The Cynics View of Corporate-controlled American Elections

Corporations fully expect that their campaign “contributions” (AKA “bribes”) will lead to some return on that investment. And, in order to hedge their bets, they willingly spend money on the campaigns of both NeoConservatives in the GOP and NeoLiberals in the Democratic Party that their lobbyists and shills (including the US Chamber of Commerce) have previously vetted/screened and then approved as fit candidates that will support the agendas of their paymasters. These anointed candidates – that only represent the far right wings or center-right wings of our One Party system – are the ones that we bamboozled voters will be fooled into voting for (usually against our best interests) when the next billion-dollar election cycle mercifully comes to an end.

The choices we voters are given when political campaigns come around have been getting more and more frustrating for thinking voters since the paranoid and hysterical pro-war, pseudo-patriotism emerged after 9/11/01.

That hysteria was orchestrated, in part, by the NeoConservative Bush administration insiders that were in the secretive Project for the New American Century (for more on the PNAC). It is obvious to many scholars and investigative journalists that the PNAC played a major role in orchestrating the catastrophic events of 9/11/01. The PNAC agenda was furthered – and actually cemented into place – by the anti-democratic Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act, not to mention the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision (see http://movetoamend.org/).

The TPP may be the End Game for the Global Corporate Elite

TPP, which has the bipartisan support of both the bribed pro-corporate Republicans and the bribed pro-corporate Democrats, probably represents the final solution to the global capitalist’s problem of providing stock market growth (and stability), the continuation of the privatization of public investments, the continued predatory lending system that destabilizes nation-states, the despoiling of the finite resources of our already corporate-poisoned planet, and the comforting march onward of the meaningless Dow-Jones Industrial Averages (only 30 companies involved).

The amoral and deceptive Wall Street and War Street hucksters will be laughing all the way to their off shore tax evading banks when TPP passes. Obama may not be fully aware of what he is a part of.

I can no longer trust anything that happens in the “hallowed halls” of the Global Corporate Congress which seems to have the blessings of both the “dirty trick” gridlock masters in the GOP and the often co-opted and the apparently well-meaning but sometimes naïve Democrats. The ruling elites, their amoral lobbyists, their non-human, sociopathic corporations and their bought-and-paid-for lapdog politicians operate as if they have no shame; they know who they are and it is our patriotic duty to identify them and put them out of office.

TPP Represents the Anti-democracy End-game of the Global Elite

It looks like the TPP is the economic end-game that the corporatists and corrupt capitalists have been played so cunningly, with behind the scenes support from their transnational corporate partners in the once-honorable 1) US Chamber of Commerce ,

2) the Koch brothers,

3) the American Legislative Exchange Council ,

4) large majorities in America’s Global Corporate Congress and

5) most every brain-washed (or brain-dead) greedy private “free market” investor with a 401K.

The desperate little guy investor with his mutual fund-loaded stock portfolios and 401Ks can be justifiably accused of being accomplices in the corporate exploitation – and the inevitable despoiling – of the air, water, soil and food (AKA “man-made” climate change) and the militarization of the upper atmosphere by the Pentagon and the lethal weapons industries.

Of course, these investors, suppressing the ethics they learned in Sunday School, know that their portfolios may temporarily increase in value after TPP gets passed, but they may not know that they and their children will likely be permanently disadvantaged when their loved ones lose their jobs or see wages and benefits disappear in the race-to-the-bottom competition from exploitive foreign competitors – all for the long-term benefit of the cunning multinational TPP manipulators at the top.

The TPP vs the Emancipation Proclamation? Democracy Loses

And here is where the “un-mentioned” juxtapositions of last week’s major events come in.

Obama scored a lot of points with his pro-democracy, anti-racist, anti-discrimination rhetoric last week, but he should have lost many of those points by simultaneously pushing the bi-partisan and radically anti-democracy TPP. Time will tell. One wonders if his speechwriters saw the irony.

Oboma’s speechwriters certainly haven’t pointed out the obviously evil Dick Cheney-style dark side of the TPP’s union-busting, anti-worker, anti-jobs, pro-corporate, pro-BigPharma, pro-Wall Street agenda. It is a virtual certainty that Obama has never read all of the secret 30 chapters in the treaty agreement. No one in Congress has been even allowed to adequately study all the secret provisions.

After considering all of the above, I realized that if the TPP had been the law of the land before Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, the tyrannical, apartheid-style (AKA, fascist) plantation slavery system in the South could have successfully sued the Lincoln administration and then fined the government hefty amounts of money for harming its economic bottom line and its future profits if it ever tried to end the highly lucrative business.

It would have been a no-brainer for the shyster lawyers (“shyster” is the term my father always used when referred to corporate lawyers) employed by any corporate-funded New World Order courts like the TPP, NAFTA or World Trade Organization to prove that the bottom lines of any slave holding (or sweat shop, or unionized) company would have been negatively affected if their profit-based system was outlawed. This would have been especially true if the proclamation had been issued by a despised, intellectual, educated, “liberal”, “nigger-loving”, uppity president who was also an eloquent speaker.

If the slaves were set free, allowed to vote or allowed to have their own churches, what would happen to the profits of pro-slavery, racist tyrants like South Carolina’s US Senator John C. Calhoun (see below)?

Any corporate-controlled court of law that was approved by the anti-democratic TPP rules would easily see that future profits of the plantation system would be severely and negatively impacted by the Emancipation Proclamation, and thus the humanitarian aims of president Lincoln would have been declared illegal and contrary to the treaty. The US government would have lost the case or more likely, the case would have been thrown out of court before the Star Chamber tribunal even reached for its gavel.

More

The Emergence of Orwellian Newspeak and the Death of Free Speech

2 Comments

RutherfordHeader_2
By John W. Whitehead
June 29, 2015

This commentary is also available at www.rutherford.org.

“If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none. Let him forget there is such a thing as war. If the government is inefficient, top-heavy, and tax-mad, better it be all those than that people worry over it…. Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information. Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy, because facts of that sort don’t change.” ― Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

How do you change the way people think? You start by changing the words they use.

In totalitarian regimes—a.k.a. police states—where conformity and whitehad bokcompliance are enforced at the end of a loaded gun, the government dictates what words can and cannot be used. In countries where the police state hides behind a benevolent mask and disguises itself as tolerance, the citizens censor themselves, policing their words and thoughts to conform to the dictates of the mass mind.

Even when the motives behind this rigidly calibrated reorientation of societal language appear well-intentioned—discouraging racism, condemning violence, denouncing discrimination and hatred—inevitably, the end result is the same: intolerance, indoctrination and infantilism.

It’s political correctness disguised as tolerance, civility and love, but what it really amounts to is the chilling of free speech and the demonizing of viewpoints that run counter to the cultural elite.

As a society, we’ve become fearfully polite, careful to avoid offense, and largely unwilling to be labeled intolerant, hateful, closed-minded or any of the other toxic labels that carry a badge of shame today. The result is a nation where no one says what they really think anymore, at least if it runs counter to the prevailing views. Intolerance is the new scarlet letter of our day, a badge to be worn in shame and humiliation, deserving of society’s fear, loathing and utter banishment from society.

For those “haters” who dare to voice a different opinion, retribution is swift: they will be shamed, shouted down, silenced, censored, fired, cast out and generally relegated to the dust heap of ignorant, mean-spirited bullies who are guilty of various “word crimes.”

We have entered a new age where, as commentator Mark Steyn notes, “we have to tiptoe around on ever thinner eggshells” and “the forces of ‘tolerance’ are intolerant of anything less than full-blown celebratory approval.”

In such a climate of intolerance, there can be no freedom speech, expression or thought.

Yet what the forces of political correctness fail to realize is that they owe a debt to the so-called “haters” who have kept the First Amendment robust. From swastika-wearing Neo-Nazis marching through Skokie, Illinois, and underaged cross burners to “God hates fags” protesters assembled near military funerals, those who have inadvertently done the most to preserve the right to freedom of speech for all have espoused views that were downright unpopular, if not hateful.

Until recently, the U.S. Supreme Court has reiterated that the First Amendment prevents the government from proscribing speech, or even expressive conduct, because it disapproves of the ideas expressed. However, that long-vaunted, Court-enforced tolerance for “intolerant” speech has now given way to a paradigm in which the government can discriminate freely against First Amendment activity that takes place within a government forum. Justifying such discrimination as “government speech,” the Court ruled that the Texas Dept. of Motor Vehicles could refuse to issue specialty license plate designs featuring a Confederate battle flag. Why? Because it was deemed offensive.

The Court’s ruling came on the heels of a shooting in which a 21-year-old white gunman killed nine African-Americans during a Wednesday night Bible study at a church in Charleston, N.C. The two events, coupled with the fact that gunman Dylann Roof was reportedly pictured on several social media sites with a Confederate flag, have resulted in an emotionally charged stampede to sanitize the nation’s public places of anything that smacks of racism, starting with the Confederate flag and ballooning into a list that includes the removal of various Civil War monuments.

These tactics are nothing new. This nation, birthed from puritanical roots, has always struggled to balance its love of liberty with its moralistic need to censor books, music, art, language, symbols etc. As author Ray Bradbury notes, “There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches.”

Indeed, thanks to the rise of political correctness, the population of book burners, censors, and judges has greatly expanded over the years so that they run the gamut from left-leaning to right-leaning and everything in between. By eliminating words, phrases and symbols from public discourse, the powers-that-be are sowing hate, distrust and paranoia. In this way, by bottling up dissent, they are creating a pressure cooker of stifled misery that will eventually blow.

For instance, the word “Christmas” is now taboo in the public schools, as is the word “gun.” Even childish drawings of soldiers result in detention or suspension under rigid zero tolerance policies. On college campuses, trigger warnings are being used to alert students to any material they might read, see or hear that might upset them, while free speech zones restrict anyone wishing to communicate a particular viewpoint to a specially designated area on campus. Things have gotten so bad that comedians such as Chris Rock and Jerry Seinfeld refuse to perform stand-up routines to college crowds anymore.

Clearly, the country is undergoing a nervous breakdown, and the news media is helping to push us to the brink of insanity by bombarding us with wall-to-wall news coverage and news cycles that change every few days.

In this way, it’s difficult to think or debate, let alone stay focused on one thing—namely, holding the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law—and the powers-that-be understand this.

As I document in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, regularly scheduled trivia and/or distractions keep the citizenry tuned into the various breaking news headlines and entertainment spectacles and tuned out to the government’s steady encroachments on our freedoms. These sleight-of-hand distractions and diversions are how you control a population, either inadvertently or intentionally, advancing a political agenda agenda without much opposition from the citizenry.

Professor Jacques Ellul studied this phenomenon of overwhelming news, short memories and the use of propaganda to advance hidden agendas. “One thought drives away another; old facts are chased by new ones,” wrote Ellul.

Under these conditions there can be no thought. And, in fact, modern man does not think about current problems; he feels them. He reacts, but he does not understand them any more than he takes responsibility for them. He is even less capable of spotting any inconsistency between successive facts; man’s capacity to forget is unlimited. This is one of the most important and useful points for the propagandists, who can always be sure that a particular propaganda theme, statement, or event will be forgotten within a few weeks.

Already, the outrage over the Charleston shooting and racism are fading from the news headlines, yet the determination to censor the Confederate symbol remains. Before long, we will censor it from our thoughts, sanitize it from our history books, and eradicate it from our monuments without even recalling why. The question, of course, is what’s next on the list to be banned?

It was for the sake of preserving individuality and independence that James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, fought for a First Amendment that protected the “minority” against the majority, ensuring that even in the face of overwhelming pressure, a minority of one—even one who espouses distasteful viewpoints—would still have the right to speak freely, pray freely, assemble freely, challenge the government freely, and broadcast his views in the press freely.

This freedom for those in the unpopular minority constitutes the ultimate tolerance in a free society. Conversely, when we fail to abide by Madison’s dictates about greater tolerance for all viewpoints, no matter how distasteful, the end result is always the same: an indoctrinated, infantilized citizenry that marches in lockstep with the governmental regime.

Some of this past century’s greatest dystopian literature shows what happens when the populace is transformed into mindless automatons. In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, reading is banned and books are burned in order to suppress dissenting ideas, while televised entertainment is used to anesthetize the populace and render them easily pacified, distracted and controlled.

In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, serious literature, scientific thinking and experimentation are banned as subversive, while critical thinking is discouraged through the use of conditioning, social taboos and inferior education. Likewise, expressions of individuality, independence and morality are viewed as vulgar and abnormal.

And in George Orwell’s 1984, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.” In this dystopian vision of the future, the Thought Police serve as the eyes and ears of Big Brother, while the Ministry of Peace deals with war and defense, the Ministry of Plenty deals with economic affairs (rationing and starvation), the Ministry of Love deals with law and order (torture and brainwashing), and the Ministry of Truth deals with news, entertainment, education and art (propaganda). The mottos of Oceania: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

All three—Bradbury, Huxley and Orwell—had an uncanny knack for realizing the future, yet it is Orwell who best understood the power of language to manipulate the masses. Orwell’s Big Brother relied on Newspeak to eliminate undesirable words, strip such words as remained of unorthodox meanings and make independent, non-government-approved thought altogether unnecessary. To give a single example, as psychologist Erich Fromm illustrates in his afterword to 1984:

The word free still existed in Newspeak, but it could only be used in such statements as “This dog is free from lice” or “This field is free from weeds.” It could not be used in its old sense of “politically free” or “intellectually free,” since political and intellectual freedom no longer existed as concepts….

Where we stand now is at the juncture of OldSpeak (where words have meanings, and ideas can be dangerous) and Newspeak (where only that which is “safe” and “accepted” by the majority is permitted). The power elite has made their intentions clear: they will pursue and prosecute any and all words, thoughts and expressions that challenge their authority.

This is the final link in the police state chain.

Having been reduced to a cowering citizenry—mute in the face of elected officials who refuse to represent us, helpless in the face of police brutality, powerless in the face of militarized tactics and technology that treat us like enemy combatants on a battlefield, and naked in the face of government surveillance that sees and hears all—we have nowhere left to go. Our backs are to the walls. From this point on, we have only two options: go down fighting, or capitulate and betray our loved ones, our friends and our selves by insisting that, as a brainwashed Winston Smith does at the end of Orwell’s 1984, yes, 2+2 does equal 5.

WC: 1909

 

Will Republicans Keep the Court from Blowing Obama’s Cover?

3 Comments

 

new logoorient

 

 

by Jane M. Orient, M.D.

___________________________________________________

The Big Lie of ObamaCare is in the title: the Affordable Care Act. Administration officials invoke “affordable” over and over again.

The U.S. Supreme Court could well blow the Democrats’ cover in King v. Burwell if it rules that people in the 37 states that did not establish an Exchange cannot legally get taxpayer subsidies for health insurance.

The subsidies hide the reality. People generally look only at what they themselves have to pay. They do not care what faceless taxpayers are paying to insurance companies for their policies.

Of the 11.7 million Americans who now have private health insurance through federal and state marketplaces, 86 percent of them are receiving financial assistance from federal taxpayers to help pay premiums—or, more accurately, their insurance company is.

“More than seven million people could lose subsidies, making insurance unaffordable,” said White House officials, according to the New York Times.

These subsidies (“tax credits”) averaged $263 a month and reduced the premium by 72 percent, on average. Taxpayers who manage to earn more than a certain threshold thus have to pay 100 percent of their own premiums plus their “fair share” of 72 percent of premiums for those who earn less.

Assuming that they will be blamed for the surge in the number of uninsured, although they did not write the law, congressional Republicans are scurrying for ways to “fix” the problem of a purported “mistake” in drafting the law.

The only problem they apparently see is that people would lose coverage—not that ObamaCare drove premiums to unaffordable levels. And the only remedy they can think of is to force others to pay the unaffordable cost, at least for a time. Not having learned from vast experience, they assume that an extension of subsidies will be temporary.

One would like to see Republicans explain to the people why the whole structure of ObamaCare is a mistake, which worsens and solidifies the problems that make American medical care so costly in the first place. These are the simple, incontrovertible facts:
• Guaranteed issue/community rating always drives up premiums and leads to a “death spiral.” Unless premiums are based on risk, people have no incentive to buy insurance when they are well.
• Mandates to pay for expensive services people do not need or want help purveyors of such services but drive up premiums.
• Third-party payment itself always and everywhere drives costs far higher than people would pay if spending their own money.
• Administrative micromanagement drives up costs and limits access.
• Insurance is not the only way to buy medical care—just the most expensive way.

ObamaCare needs to be repealed. Tweaking one of the interlocking parts just makes the interconnected rest even more unworkable. If the Supreme Court exposes the true cost by removing the veil of subsidies, Republicans should not try to cover it up.

If people lose coverage, another shocking truth might be revealed, to the horror of the insurance cartel: they might be better off. The unsubsidized share of premiums—instead of being sucked into the insurer’s bank account—would be available to buy actual care, which people might now avoid because of high ObamaCare deductibles. A market might develop for true catastrophic-only insurance, with appropriately low premiums. Note that if ObamaCare insurance becomes unaffordable because of lack of subsidies, the individual mandate penalty/tax does not apply.

Of the money paid to insurers, at least 15 percent goes to administration and much more to activities like “quality assurance” that provide nothing recognizable to patients as a medical service or product. And if the insurer does pay for something, it decides exactly what, when, and how much a beneficiary might receive.

There are many alternatives to dependence on the government/insurer monolith, which the cartel would love to crush, such as health sharing ministries, direct-pay practices, and indemnity insurance. More resources are becoming available to patients (for example, medicalselfsufficiency.com and selfpaypatient.com).

Republicans should not help to suppress alternatives by propping up the ObamaCare monster and leaving the façade of subsidies intact.

###

http://www.aapsonline.org/

About the author/contributor: More

Keeping Government Bureaucrats Off the Backs of the Citizenry: The Supreme Court Responds

1 Comment

By John W. Whitehead
June 22, 2015

This commentary is also available at www.rutherford.org.

_____________________________________________________
“No man in the wrong can stand up against a fellow that’s in the right and keeps on a-comin’.”—Texas Rangers

In one swoop, on June 22, 2015, a divided U.S. Supreme Court handed down three consecutive rulings affirming the right of raisin farmers, hotel owners and prison inmates. However, this push back against government abuse, government snooping and government theft only came about because some determined citizens stood up and took a stand against tyranny.

The three cases respectively deal with the government’s confiscation of whitehad bokagricultural crops without any guarantee or promise of payment (Horne v. U.S. Department of Agriculture); the practice of police gaining unfettered access to motel and hotel guest registries (City of Los Angeles v. Patel); and the use of tasers and excessive force by prison officials (Kingsley v. Hendrickson).

Whether these three rulings will amount to much in the long run remains to be seen. In the meantime, they sound a cautiously optimistic note at a time when police state forces continue to use advancing technologies, surveillance and militarization to weaken, sidestep and flout the Constitution at almost every turn.

In the first case, Horne v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, a 5-4 Supreme Court declared that raisin farmer Marvin Horne deserves to be compensated for the official seizure of one-third of his personal property by the government.

The case arose after independent raisin farmers in California were fined almost $700,000 for refusing to surrender about 40% of the raisins they produced to the government as part of a program purportedly aimed at maintaining a stable market for commodities.

Marvin and Laura Horne are independent farmers in California and have been growing raisins for almost half a century. During that time, the Hornes were subject to a Depression-era law promulgated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture that aims to create “orderly” market conditions for raisins by regulating their supply. Supply is regulated by requiring that raisin producers surrender a certain percentage of their raisins (a so-called “reserve tonnage”) each year to an administrative committee. More

Prisons Without Walls: We’re All Inmates in the American Police State

4 Comments

By John W. Whitehead
June 15, 2015

This commentary is also available at www.rutherford.org.
“It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison and yet not free—to be under no physical constraint and yet be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel and act as the representatives of the national state, or of some private interest within the nation wants him to think, feel and act. . . . To him the walls of his prison are invisible and he believes himself to be free.”—Aldous Huxley, A Brave New World Revisited

“Free worlders” is prison slang for those who are not incarcerated behind prison walls. Supposedly, those fortunate souls live in the “free world.” However, appearances can be deceiving.

“As I got closer to retiring from the Federal Bureau of Prisons,” writes former prison employee Marlon

ABOUT JOHN WHITEHEAD  Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.

ABOUT JOHN WHITEHEAD
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at http://www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.

Brock, “it began to dawn on me that the security practices we used in the prison system were being implemented outside those walls.” In fact, if Brock is right, then we “free worlders” do live in a prison—albeit, one without visible walls.

In federal prisons, cameras are everywhere in order to maintain “security” and keep track of the prisoners. Likewise, the “free world” is populated with video surveillance and tracking devices. From surveillance cameras in stores and street corners to license plate readers (with the ability to log some 1,800 license plates per hour) on police cars, our movements are being tracked virtually everywhere. With this increasing use of iris scanners and facial recognition software—which drones are equipped with—there would seem to be nowhere to hide.

Detection and confiscation of weapons (or whatever the warden deems “dangerous”) in prison is routine. The inmates must be disarmed. Pat downs, checkpoints, and random searches are second nature in ferreting out contraband.

Sound familiar?

Metal detectors are now in virtually all government buildings. There are the TSA scanning devices and metal detectors we all have to go through in airports. Police road blocks and checkpoints are used to perform warrantless searches for contraband. Those searched at road blocks can be searched for contraband regardless of their objections—just like in prison. And there are federal road blocks on American roads in the southwestern United States. Many of them are permanent and located up to 100 miles from the border.

Stop and frisk searches are taking place daily across the country. Some of them even involve anal and/or vaginal searches. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has approved strip searches even if you are arrested for a misdemeanor—such as a traffic stop. Just like a prison inmate.

More

WA State Bar declares WAR on WA State Citizens

2 Comments

CorruptWA

June 5, 2015 by Chief Activist

Kristen Schimpff, WSBA #31299, Assistant General Counsel for the WA State Bar claims that “The lawyer discipline system exists for the protection of the public…” and Scheidler’s RICO complaint against the WA State Bar for the Bar’s failure to “discipline corrupt lawyers” must be dismissed claiming that he “has no legally cognizable right to a particular outcome, and the dismissal of a grievance cannot give rise to a cause of action by the grievant”.

Ms. Schimpff continues to claim “the WSBA defendants (Felice Congalton, Zachary Mosner), who perform their roles in the lawyer discipline system under the authority of the Washington Supreme Court, are immune from claims for monetary damages, such as requested by Mr. Scheidler here”.

Clearly Ms. Schimpff has amply explained why our legal system is so corrupt… lawyers have a ‘protection racket’ under the WA State Supreme Court. Ms Schimpff has just stated that we citizens are the play-toys of the WA State Bar and the corrupt lawyers who devise schemes by which citizens are pockets-to-pick, estates to rape, families to destroy, and lives to ruin …. If we don’t like being screwed over, according to Ms. Schimpff, that is just tough SH=T!

Kristen Schimpff has declared WAR on WA State Citizens and on WA State’s Constitution. Article 1, Section 1, says ‘governments just powers come from the consent of the governed’ and ‘governments are established to protect and maintain individual rights’. The WA State Bar is a state agency that has somehow abandoned their duty, escaped accountability and acts contrary to its purpose.

We the PEOPLE decide the Bar’s powers… NOT Ms. Schimpff, NOR the WA State Supreme Court. WE MUST FIGHT BACK! I will fight Back! Ms. Schimpff belongs in jail along with the WA State Supreme Court judges who have established this “protection racket” for the greed and power they now claim over us! You all MUST be OUTRAGED by the arrogance of Ms. Schimpff, along with her ilk, in boldly professing the Bar’s RICO association is completely “unaccountable” for its crimes and the harms that corrupt lawyers inflict upon our society. She is a traitor to the constitution and has declared WAR on the PEOPLE… pure and simple!

– See more at: http://www.corruptwa.com/government-officials/wa-state-bar-declares-war-on-wa-state-citizens/#sthash.NFAyIxL5.dpuf

Control the Water, Control the Land—A Two-fer!

7 Comments

new-logo25by W. R. McAfee, Sr.

______________________________________________________________

The banker’s end game is to nullify the Constitution using bureaucratic agencies like the EPA to seize private property and other rights with agency “rules and regulations”—all of which are illegal under the Constitution. 

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

Good EPA “laws” (read: “rules”, “regulations”) are long extinct, but if you had to pick one it would be the 1972 Clean Water Act (CWA) passed by congress four years after the Cuyahoga River in Ohio caught fire (Images for cuyahoga river fire burning—it wasn’t the first time) because of the pollution in it.
The Act authorized the clean-up of this kind of mess in America’s navigable lakes, rivers, and streams, and prohibited further dumping of dangerous industrial chemicals, waste, and other byproducts into these bodies of waters. It also allowed states to manage the clean-up of their own waters under the Clean Water Act (CWA), and enabled federal and state officials to work together to get the job done, .
Fast forward and we find today the EPA has redefined Congress’s intent and definition of navigable waters to now include all waters found in America and by fiat, the land it’s on, meaning the EPA now has “control” of all American farms, ranches, and private property, including
►Dry arroyos, coulees, and washes
►Man-made drainage ditches
►Directional sheet flow
►Isolated wet meadows
►Storm sewers and culverts
►Drain tiles in fields
► “Point sources” such as pipes, ditches, channels, and conduits
►Sewage treatment plants
►Waterworks appurtenances such as mains, pipes, hydrants, machinery, and buildings.
►100 year flood plains
►Channels and streams with intermittent or ephemeral flows (but not seasonal flows),
►Nonnavigable, isolated, intrastate waters, including rainwaters, and hundreds of others

At the direction of their handlers (socialist bankers who control the Fed and the government) the EPA, and the president’s EO (that isn’t law) set in motion a crippling set of “rules” and “regulatory” proposals contradicting Congress’s intent of the CWA (which is law), that will expand the EPA’s authority over all waters (including subsurface “connecting” waters), its use, the land it’s used on, and any land it drains from or across.

Meaning if it rains on a piece of land, that land and water and/or its run-off will be under EPA authority.
Meaning if a dry ditch, pot hole, creek, or dirt tank on a rancher’s or farmers land stands water a few days after a heavy rain or rise, the EPA’s Waters of the United States (WOTUS) proposals gives the EPA “authority” over that normally dry ditch, pot hole, creek, or tank.
Meaning dry land drainages that aren’t navigable, boatable, fishable, or swimmable, and that defy jurisdictional need under the CWA, can now be “regulated”.

Control the water, control the land

This is the largest, illegal, private property land grab in U.S. history. Not only does it give the EPA control of the water on private property, it also requires EPA/Corps of Engineer permits if the agricultural industry wants to cut brush, clear land, root plow, burn-off, repair (field) tiles, drill a water well, spread fertilizer, lay pipe, spray cattle and hundreds of other ordinary, necessary, and routine tasks tied to any agricultural operation; all to be permitted, fee’d (charged), and “enforced” by the same unelected, unaccountable, federally paid envirocrats who wrote the proposals; who have no concept why these tasks have to be performed; whose job will be to act as land and water “police”—like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) acts on behalf of the EPA for “endangered plants and animals”— and issue permits or levy “fines” for “violators” who get caught spraying a pen of cattle without one.
Takers taxing makers.

This EPA scheme is a deliberate shakedown of property owners with forced fees and permits requiring unnecessary time and money.

Like the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the EPA’s model bait-and-switch “oops-you just-lost-control-of-your-land” conservation easements that were monikered as “. . .saving endangered plants and animals and preserving land for future generations”, so to was WOTUS sold as “clean, healthy water for all.”

Pigs fly, too.

WOTUS is about taking control of private property, driving the market value of that land down, and its owners out of business and off that land. “Cleaner water” is the public’s straw man, the excuse. WOTUS rules are purposely vague to give the EPA wide swath with its ax. So much so that interpretations by the EPA’s own employees are contradictory.

Lawsuits will follow but few can afford them. Family ranchers and farmers will be presumed guilty for unpermitted WOTUS “violations” decreed by a federal agency (the EPA) using unconstitutional federal administrative “law”(read: proposals), written and approved by federal bureaucrats and forced unconstitutionally on private citizens (with a presidential EO) who will be forced to defend themselves out-of-pocket in a federal court against federal (contract) lawyers before a federal judge—all of whom are paid from the same federal pot.

A centralized stacked federal deck.

FACTOID: Congress has the Constitutional mandate to pass America’s laws. Legislation is passed by Congress and either signed into law or vetoed by the sitting president. Courts then decide whether or not that law is Constitutional or un-Constitutional if the law is challenged. The presidential EO authorizing the EPA to use a set of vague. illegal, unlawful proposals giving the agency authority over all waters and by fiat, land, in defiance of a 40-year old established law, written and legislated by Congress and signed into law by a sitting president, defies credulity when both Houses of Congress voted against WOTUS, and the Clean Water Act was challenged twice, upheld twice, and twice ruled Constitutional by the Supreme Court.

EPA bureaucrats and the president have neither the power, authority, nor Constitutional right to force these restrictive WOTUS proposals on Americans.

This land and water grab by the EPA is reminiscent of how Bolshevik communists who, after gaining control of the Russian revolution by forcing a numerical majority of their confederates into key positions in the Duma, and placing ‘czars’ in charge of agencies (with decreed powers like those just handed the EPA) took over and controlled the Russian population. That plus the fear of spontaneous Bolshevik-directed genocides in which an estimated 60 million mostly white Russia Christians were either murdered or imprisoned in the Soviet’s Gulags as “enemies (read: terrorists) of the state.”
Communists knew the importance of controlling the land and the individuals on it, and what private (right to own) property would do to their failed, centralized, attempt at governing. That’s why fist-fights between hardline communists and right-to-own Russian property advocates broke out when this subject came up in Russia’s Duma during the lead-up to, and following, the so-called fall of communism.
An excellent summary of this fight over the right to own private property in Russia is a 2001 article by Leon Aron, “Land Privatization”

Ironically, what the Russians were fighting for, Washington just gave to the EPA to regulate.
The first EPA attempt to take over America’s land and water.

The first time the EPA tried grab control of America’s waters, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision against them when they attempted to cite the Migratory Bird Rule as authority for stopping a consortium of Chicago municipalities from using an abandoned sand and gravel pit for a solid waste disposal site; invoking the Commerce Clause—the only power given Congress by the founders with which to overrule state law.

EPA lawyers argued that migratory birds were interstate commerce generating revenue “ . . . of very nearly the first magnitude…that millions of people spent over a billion dollars annually on recreational pursuits relating to migratory birds, and that the ducks needed the water that had seeped into the gravel pits. . .”

This maneuver is called the Commerce Clause gambit that the EPA attempts to use when trying to override state sovereignty and law.

The Court didn’t buy it, saying: “…we find nothing approaching a clear statement from Congress it intended the (sic Clean Water Act) to reach an abandoned sand and gravel pit…to claim federal jurisdiction over ponds and mud flats falling within the “Migratory Bird Rule” would result in significant impingement of the state’s traditional and primary power over land and water use.”

The Second EPA Attempt to Take Over the Waters of America

Next they tried skirting the “navigational” water definition in Rapanos v United States . John A. Rapanos back-filled a portion of his 54 acres in Michigan prior to development. The nearest body of navigable water was up to 20 miles away. The EPA informed Mr. Rapanos that his “. . . saturated fields were waters of the United States that could not be filled without a permit.”

Again, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 the EPA had no authority under the Clean Water Act to regulate:
(1) Truly isolated, non-navigable, intrastate water bodies,
(2) Any area merely because it has a hydrological connection with downstream navigable-in-fact waters,
(3) Remote drains and ditches with insubstantial flows, and
(4) That federal jurisdiction under the Scalia majority (5-4 plurality) ruling in the case was that the Clean Water Act ends at “. . .those relatively permanent, standing, or continuously flowing bodies of water … that are described in ordinary parlance as ‘streams, oceans, rivers, lakes’” and their wetlands. . .”—waters covered under the Clean Water Act’s definition of navigable waters.

Failing in Congress and in the Courts, the EPA and the president, seeing their proposals had no legality, turned to the EO

Obama’s EO granted the EPA this unlawful and unconstitutional power that’s designed to further erode private property rights—an attempt right out of a rogue king’s, war lord’s, dictator’s, despot’s or Bolshevik’s playbook.

Whatever we say, goes.

This is why the founders wrote our Constitution. It’s not a “living document” as The City and their controlled propaganda outlets (MSM) blare at the public;

to be shredded every few years by gluttonous bankers bent on controlling earth’s resources and people. It was written to keep government and its go-fers out of America’s living rooms, back yards, and off our lands. The banker’s end game is to nullify the Constitution using bureaucratic agencies like the EPA to seize private property and other rights with agency “rules and regulations”—all of which are illegal under the Constitution.

Absent the right to own property and rule of law, you’re left with an “ism”—fascism, socialism, communism—and a central control system for everything, including land and water, that benefits only a handful of psychopathic financial criminals at the top.

How is it the EPA and the president can ignore constitutionally established Congressional and Supreme Court law?

Here’s how and why it’s illegal
Copyright© 2015 by W. R. McAfee. All Rights Reserved.

The Patriot Act, the law used to justify mass government surveillance, is going to expire if it’s not reauthorized this week.

6 Comments

 These 50 emergency vigils are the most effective step we can take right now to stop any senator from thinking that maybe it’s ok to renew the Patriot Act. Find a vigil near you. If you’ve never taken action on surveillance before: this is the one to take.

~Tiff Cheng

The Patriot Act, the law used to justify mass government surveillance, is going to expire if it’s not reauthorized this week.

If Congress fumbles for the next few days, the Patriot Act will not be renewed — and right now, the vote is close enough that a big push by people like you and me can tip the scales and ensure the Patriot Act expires, dealing a death blow to unconstitutional NSA programs.

We’re joining with half a dozen other organizations including Demand Progress, Restore the Fourth, CREDO, MoveOn.org, and Free Press Action Fund to host 50 “EMERGENCY vigils to Sunset the Patriot Act” across the country tomorrow night, calling on senators to vote against reauthorization.

Click here to find a Sunset the Patriot Act vigil near you (as well as find out how your senator is leaning).

Here are the details:

WHAT: Emergency “Sunset the Patriot Act” vigils against mass surveillance – happening in 50 cities across the U.S. WHEN: 7 pm local time, Thursday, May 21st (roughly an hour before sunset) WHERE: Find your local event here. If you don’t see one and want to set one up outside another of your senators’ offices, reply to this email and let us know! BRING: A cell phone, laptop, tablet, and candles with the protestsign.org already pre-loaded. Feel free to bring any other signage you want — the main message is “Sunset the Patriot Act”.

Click here to find a Sunset the Patriot Act vigil near you (as well as find out how your senator is leaning).

News reports show that the Senate is all confused so they’re going with the plan of ramming through the bills. That’s because we have filibuster threats from at least two senators — Rand Paul and Ron Wyden — a looming expiration date, and confusion about the best course of business. And, if we have voices from all over the country calling on them to end the Patriot Act, we can make them falter and split and fall all over themselves. This is the time when doing nothing actually helps us.

That’s why action right now is critical — according to our whip count, dozens of senators are still on the fence, and protests across the country the day before the vote can prevent them from throwing their support behind the Patriot Act. If we can prevent these last senators from siding with the NSA, the Patriot Act will expire.

After all these years of fighting against how the Patriot Act has torn up our freedoms without making us any safer, it all comes down to the next couple of days. This is our week to end the Patriot Act.

Click here to join a Sunset the Patriot Act vigil near you.

If you haven’t done anything yet to push back against government mass surveillance, please take action now. There are just 2 days left at our best and final chance at reforming surveillance for years to come.

Thanks for all you do,

Fight for the Future

DONATE NOW

Want more awesome more often?
* Like us on Facebook * Follow us on Twitter
* Keep us fighting, chip in what you can.

Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement: Trade agreements are NOT constitutional treaty’s

3 Comments

new logoMarti Oakley

______________________________________________________

The question continually asked is: Under what constitutional authority are the provisions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership being kept secret?

The answer: The TPP is NOT a constitutional treaty, but is instead a corporate government-to-government contractual agreement, and is being intentionally confused and mis-represented as a constitutional treaty. Its status as “secret” can only be defined as corporate contractual proprietary rights protection. 1

_________________________________________________________

1800193_730804716942054_2388486452391946819_nObama has asked congress for Fast Track approval for this corporate trade agreement. This is another tip-off that what is about to transpire has nothing to do with sovereignty, the constitution or the office of the president. Fast Track allows the president to step out of his position as “president of the Republic”, and assume his position as “chief executive” of the corporation and assorted corporate names constructed to facilitate the contracting for this trade agreement.

The TPP needs no ratification by the states as it has nothing to do with them. They are not privy to the contents, provisions, mandates or other instruments as the states are not party to the contract. The vote that will take place in congress will be an intentionally staged event. Every congress person out there knows that any vote they take regarding this trade agreement, violates the offices they were elected to hold.

With the public seemingly unaware that they are being duped, yet again, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will devastate the states. The recent efforts by several federal agencies to seize land, control food production, close public access roads to forests and national parks, along with the ongoing efforts to seize water from all sources whatsoever as owned and controlled by government, along with all other valued resources is most likely the composition of much of the content of the TPP.

The (TTP) is actually an international corporate agreement which voids sovereign jurisdiction in environmental protections, health, food, pharmaceuticals and virtually any other thing you can think of.
This agreement also allows for the sale of public lands here in the US so that foreign investors can access and profit from the resources. The coming all out sale of public lands to foreign investors will in effect, see major areas of the US, now held as scenic waterways, national forests and other high resource areas as owned and controlled by non-American corporations and possibly even governments. This agreement exposes the reasons for the federal government’s ongoing taking of lands from the states and claiming it as owned and controlled by them while also claiming they are taking the land to “protect” it……from us.

Trade agreements are constructed under international contract law and have no constitutional authority. In fact, these trade agreements generally tend to violate and void any constitutional protections, requirements or prohibitions. Even so, congress will continue to misrepresent this corporate agreement as a legally binding constitutional treaty, knowing full well that this is merely a ruse they participate in to cement in the public mind that they must adhere to this corporate contract.

Although you and I are not party to the contractual agreement, do not and are not allowed to know any of the provisions, much less all of the provisions, the federal corporation will contract with our state government corporations to put the provisions into force in our states. And every governor in every state will willingly throw the doors open to the in-state contracting that will facilitate the business plans of the trade agreement.

So I ask again…..How’s that global economy working for ya? Still think this is about free trade and capitalism? Your land is being stolen by the federal government, sold to foreign investors and other governments for exploitation as they pay for government protection and privilege. Do you still think that if corporations are regulated and limited it will somehow prevent you from getting rich?

These agreements are a constructed effort to put the rights of corporations above those of the individual and of any country included in the agreements. The group, Public Citizen, exposed and reported on the deleterious effects of what will become the investor-state and the accompanying enforcement system already at work under CAFTA, and other trade agreements, which will most likely be expanded and far more injurious under TPP.

From Public Citizen:

These firms have access under the deals to an “investor-state” enforcement system, which allows them to skirt national court systems and privately enforce their extraordinary new investor privileges by directly challenging national governments before extrajudicial tribunals.
These investor-state cases are litigated outside any domestic legal system in special international arbitration bodies of the World Bank and the United Nations. A panel composed of three private attorneys listens to arguments in the case, with the power to award an unlimited amount of taxpayer dollars to corporations for the “expected future profits” that the attorneys surmise the firms would have earned if not for the challenged measures. Because the mechanism elevates private firms to the same status as sovereign governments, it amounts to a privatization of the justice system. (emphasis, mine)

The TPP is nothing less than a corporate assault on national sovereignty and the rights of the people. Those courts will most likely be comprised of another group of private attorney’s who will decide how much of your money will be handed over to global corporations. Any rights you thought you might still have will be set aside in favor of global corporate privilege.

Our Constitution is being steadily eroded with the passing of each of these trade agreements. Agreements that exist for no other reason than to exploit and plunder nation after nation under the dubious banner of “free trade capitalism” and which will reduce every nation to third world status. There never has been free trade; only pay to play trade privatization for the few.

The Trans Pacific Partnership is just another brick in the New World Order wall.

More

What law says the text of the TPP must remain secret?

1 Comment

NoMoreFakeNews

              What law says the text of the TPP must remain secret?

By Jon Rappoport
May 15, 2015

To the US Congress: reveal the contents of the TPP now

It seems like a case of mass hypnosis. People claiming they can’t say what’s in the TPP trade agreement. And mainstream media accept this premise.

“That’s right. Congress must stay silent.”

Pop quiz: who says the text of the TPP must remain secret?

Under what authority?

Members of Congress are scuttling around like weasels, claiming they can’t disclose what’s in this far-reaching, 12-nation trade treaty.

They can go into a sealed room and read a draft, but they can’t copy pages, and they can’t tell the public what they just read.

Why not?

If there is a US law forbidding disclosure, name the law.

Can you recall anything in the Constitution that establishes secret treaties?

Is there a prior treaty that states the text of all treaties can be hidden from the people?

I see no authority anywhere that justifies withholding the text of the TPP.

Government legislators in the other 11 nations: why can’t you reveal what’s in the TPP?

Mass silence around the world. “Sorry, we can’t say what’s in the treaty. We’ll vote on it, but you the people have no input. You have to take what we do on faith.”

Who says so? By what authority?

If a US Senator held a press conference today and explained everything he read in that sealed room about the TPP, what exactly would happen to him? Would he be arrested?

Would he be charged with a federal crime?

What crime?

More

Howard Lyman (featured in “Cowspiracy” and author of “Mad Cowboy”) on Wild Horse & Burro Radio (Wed., 5/13/15)

7 Comments

painy

Wild_Horse_Burro_Radio_LogoJoin us on Wild Horse Wednesday (*SM) , May 13, 2015

1:00 pm PST … 2:00 pm MST … 3:00 pm CST … 4:00 pm EST

Listen to the live show Here!

You can also listen to the show on your phone by calling (917) 388-4520.

This is a 1 hour show.  It will be archived so you can listen to it anytime.

If you have a question for Howard, please email it to ppj1@hush.com More

UN Small Arms Treaty: How they plan to disarm America

1 Comment

NAGRHeader_Banner_314

NAGR

On August 24, U.N. “Small Arms Treaty” nations are set to kick off a secretive, closed-door conference in Mexico City to begin making their utopian vision of a gun-free globe a reality . . .

ObamaUNGunBan_EmailBanner_600x150Click here to sign the petition

And without your IMMEDIATE action, I’m afraid this conference is going to result in a horde of new U.N.-directed anti-gun regulations and restrictions here in the United States as early as this fall.

Since day one of President Barack Obama’s administration, gun-grabbers have salivated over the prospects of finally realizing the United Nations’ so-called “Small Arms Treaty.”

Obama1In the works since the 1990’s Clinton administration, the U.N.’s “Small Arms Treaty” is the gun-grabbers’ crown jewel.

It’s gun control on a global scale – setting the stage for international bureaucrats to finally realize their goal of registering and CONFISCATING firearms around the world.

Today, even after a handful of half-measures by Congress to hold off implementation, I’m afraid the gun-grabbers could very well get their wish – all under the guise of combating “Insurgents, armed gang members, pirates, [and] terrorists” according to the U.N.’s Department of Disarmament Affairs.

That’s why it’s critical you click here to sign your “NO U.N. Gun Ban” petition to your U.S. kerrymccainRepresentative and Senators right away.

NAGR

Second Amendment supporters here in America can’t afford to stick our heads in the sand any longer – not with the gun control freight train I fear is headed our way.

Thanks to the efforts of good folks like you, many Second Amendment supporters cheered when the U.S. Senate refused to take up the U.N.’s “Small Arms Treaty” for ratification.

And I know many took a sigh of relief when Congress passed legislation curtailing the use of American tax dollars for the full Treaty’s implementation last year.

But I’m afraid all of the celebrations started too soon.

130 nations – including the United States – have signed on to the Treaty signaling conceptual support. 67 have ratified it requiring legal compliance with the U.N.’s demands.

The number of anti-gun provisions incorporated in the Treaty and now being pushed by the U.N. are almost too many to list.

UN1 But by far the worst of its provisions encourage nations that accept the terms of the U.N.’s “Small Arms Treaty” to provide the details of “end users” of firearms.

This is nothing more than gun registration – ensuring INTERNATIONAL bureaucrats have all the information they need to create a global database of gun owners at their fingertips.

Now, emboldened by the U.N. Treaty “entering into force” on Christmas Eve of 2014, gun-grabbers can hardly contain their glee.

They believe bureaucratic red tape, new regulations being imposed by the Obama administration – and new Treaty standards American gun manufacturers will have to abide by to export firearms to many countries – will ultimately bring the U.S. to its knees.

NAGR

In fact, one spokesman for the anti-gun International Action Network on Small Arms bragged that even countries that refuse to ratify the Treaty will ultimately comply “because of peer pressure but also market pressure.”

And another anti-gun country’s foreign minister bragged, “we expect the U.S. to abide by the Treaty even if ratification will take some time.”

In April, a three-day training course was conducted for international government officials who signed the Treaty “on how to implement its provisions effectively” in Geneva, Switzerland.

In August, a secretive “First Conference of State Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty” is set to take place in Mexico City.

The doors will be closed to anyone who hasn’t supported the treaty. But you and I know what their target will be. More

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

2 Comments

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

I’m a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!  If you’re not a believer, please reconsider the true facts. This is history; not what’s being shown on TV, sanctioned by our illustrious delusional leaders in Washington.

Gun-control-and-genocide-old-story-95855039434PLEASE DON’T THINK FOR A MOMENT, THAT THIS COULDN’T HAPPEN IN OUR COUNTRY ALSO!!!!!!

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control:

· From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control:

· From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938:

· From 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935:

· From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964:

· From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970:

· From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956:

· From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

56 million defenseless people were rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.

You won’t see this data on the U.S. evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

With guns, we are ‘citizens’; without them, we are ‘subjects’.

During WW II, the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

Gun owners in the USA are the largest armed forces in the World!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.

The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense.

The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either.

SWITZERLAND ISSUES A GUN TO EVERY HOUSEHOLD! SWITZERLAND’S GOVERNMENT ISSUES AND TRAINS EVERY ADULT IN THE USE OF A RIFLE.

SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN-RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!

IT’S A NO BRAINER! DON’T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.

 

Fake Disney measles outbreak: send in the clowns

1 Comment

Originally posted on Jon Rappoport's Blog:

Fake Disney measles outbreak: send in the clowns

by Jon Rappoport

February 15, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Lacking any real science proving we have a serious 2015 measles outbreak, and lacking any science supporting the idea that the measles vaccine is safe and effective, we’re looking at a psyop called The Disney Story. A fake horror movie happening at ‘the happiest place on Earth,’ Disneyland. It’s a perfect way to scare the moms into vaccinating their kiddies. If the happiest place on Earth isn’t safe, then where is safety? ‘Mickey Mouse infects children.’ Cue the ominous music. ‘Cotton candy dream turns into nightmare.’ ‘Send in the clowns, carriers of the virus.’” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

150 measles cases. No deaths.

Dangerous outbreak? Are you kidding?

Mainstream media recalling past problems with the measles vaccine? Are you kidding? The news brushes off what happened 24 hours ago.

Medical scholars and historians are no…

View original 683 more words

BARACK OBAMA: AMERICA’S FIRST ANTI-AMERICAN PRESIDENT

15 Comments

new-logo25By John Wallace – New York Oath Keepers
www.OathKeepersNY.org
www.LibertyNewsOnLine.com

__________________________________________________

When former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said, “I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that that President Obama loves America. He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.” It took a lot of guts for Rudy to say it, because almost immediately he was attacked by Democrats, the national liberal media and even a few “deflated” Republicans. The attack on Giuliani was almost instantaneous. Anyone who even hinted that they might support Giuliani or had doubts about Mr. Obama’s love for America had to be attacked as mean spirited, cruel, unpatriotic and if those words didn’t work, they had to be called racists.

It was not that Rudy Giuliani wasn’t telling the truth because he was. It was because it was politically incorrect to say such a thing about a sitting president, even though Barack Obama pretty much said the same thing about President George W. Bush while Bush was still the president and Obama was a U.S. Senator. Although I agree with Mr. Giuliani that Barack Obama does not love America, I will go a step further and say it is more serious than our current president not loving this country.

If you remember, before and right after Barack Obama was elected President, he said that he was going to fundamentally transform or change America. If he did really love America, why is he trying so hard to fundamentally change it into a socialist country where the federal government has absolute power over the people? The answer is simple. He wants to change it, not because he loves America, but because he doesn’t even like it. As you shall see in the information outlined later in this article, Barack Obama, from a young age, was indoctrinated by American-hating communists and Marxists into believing that America is an evil capitalist country that must be brought to its knees and punished for being an Anglo-Imperialist country that became rich on the backs of the people of third world countries. More

Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,719 other followers

%d bloggers like this: