“I Stand With You” As The Whole World Crumbles!!!

This is a well researched essay and worth the time to read! It will make you think and possibly scare the complacency out of you! It is posted at – http://www.wolkeworks.com/I_Stand_With_You.html where there are many other articles worth reading.

The photos are my additions.

988424_10152052669055197_3343123465712111828_n

“Obama’s victory was more than a progressive move; it was a dialectical leap ushering in a qualitatively new era of struggle. Marx once compared revolutionary struggle with the work of a mole who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface. This is the old ‘revolutionary mole’ not only showing his traces on the surface but also breaking through.” – Frank Chapman of the Communist Party of the USA’s newspaper, People’s Weekly World on January 12, 2008 after Obama’s Iowa Caucus victory.
Just who is Barack Hussein Obama? Is he just another “progressive” member of the Democratic Party? Or could he be something worse, a conscious agent of a foreign power? Does he have a secret agenda to harm the United States? Or is he simply someone whose well- meaning policies have turned out to be antithetical to the interests of the American people? What follows is necessarily speculative, but if you connect the dots, the case should do more than raise eyebrows.
If you look at the rise of Barack Obama from obscure community organizer to President of the United States you have to be amazed at the speed in which he climbed to the heights of power and the total lack of qualifications he exhibited before attaining the highest office. You also have to wonder about the people in his past and their associations.
As many people know by now, Obama was the product of Stanley Ann Dunham, a girl who was far left in her politics and somehow enamored with dark skin men who were anti-American. Her parents were apparently also far left anti-Americans and they moved to a suburb of Seattle, Washington, so that their young girl could attend Mercer Island High School. It was run by a communist who also ran the “little red church on the hill”, a Unitarian church that the Dunham family attended.
Dunham allegedly married Barack Obama, Sr., a student from Kenya whom she met in Russian classes at the University of Hawaii. About five months after their alleged marriage (there are no records of it available), Stanley Ann gave birth to the man we know as Barack
                           
The Psychopath?
Hussein Obama, but who was called Barry in his youth. The two, Stanley and Barack Sr., never lived together and almost immediately after giving birth, Stanley Ann left to attend the University of Washington in Seattle. Obama, Sr., left to attend Harvard University not too long after that. So young Obama never saw his father until he was ten years old in 1971 and that was a short visit. Meanwhile, Stanley Ann found another third world, leftist husband, Lolo Soetoro, from Indonesia and went to Jakarta to live with him, taking along young Barry. During his stint in Indonesia, Barry attended a school where he was listed as a Muslim and where he liked to attend Koran classes. One of his former classmates describes him then as a devout Muslim.
In any case, when Lolo started to work for an American oil company and actually became pro-American, Stanley Ann sent young Barack back to Hawaii to ensure he would be under the guidance of her appropriately anti-American parents.
In due course, Barry’s grandfather, also named Stanley Dunham, decided that the young lad needed a black male role model and mentor and sent the 10 year old to be guided by his friend, Frank Marshall Davis, a black member of the Communist Party, poet, pornographer, bisexual pedophile and sexual predator. Barry remained under the influence of Davis until he left for college at age 18.
There are reasons to believe that Davis may have actually been Obama’s father. In one of his books, Davis describes a young white girl named Ann as one of his frequent sex partners, and Obama looks more like Davis than he does Barack, Sr. (For one thing, Obama has a lot of facial skin tags as did Davis.) Likewise, Davis had pictures of a nude girl that closely resemble Stanley Ann, although who she actually was has not been proven. Perhaps that’s the reason Barack Obama, Sr., never showed that much interest in his son but Davis did. According to one theory, Barack Sr. was allegedly persuaded to provide a name for the infant in return for extending his visa in the United States. In any case, young Obama was handed over to Davis for mentoring.
It was during this period that Barry attended an elite Honolulu private school, Punahou, noted for its international students and, according to some, an anti-American ideology. Considering that Obama was schooled as a Muslim in Indonesia and at an international school during his formative years, where and when was he taught to think of himself as an American?
While at Punahou, he started out well but soon saw his academic achievements deteriorate, possibly due to his hanging out with the “Choom gang”, a sort of marijuana smokers club. That was not surprising since Davis was heavily into drinking and drug use. What other influences Davis had on young Obama are not readily apparent, although since Davis was into various sexual perversions, perhaps he influenced the child’s views on sexuality. This was a man who took the young boy to bars to drink booze, smoke pot, and watch pornographic cartoons being projected on the walls. Young Obama spent a lot of his youth doing drugs and drinking booze. Moreover, in a poem Obama wrote about Davis, he mentioned the amber stain they both had on their shorts. Was this a reference to a sexual relationship? In later life, various people would accuse Obama of being bisexual and a member of a gay men’s club in Chicago. One thing we can be certain of is that young Barry was indoctrinated with communism by Davis and probably his grandfather, Stanley.

davis ann barry s
Barry went to Occidental College, noted as the Moscow of California, where he was described by one of his associates at the time, Jim Drew, as not just sympathetic to communism, but an ardent communist revolutionary. This is when he changed his name to Barack Hussein Obama even though he had probably been adopted in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro and may well have been a citizen of that country. His roommates and friends there included Pakistanis Wahid Hamid and Mohamed Hasan Chandoo. After Occidental, Obama allegedly made a trip to Pakistan in 1981.
What’s interesting is that Obama never mentioned this Pakistan trip in either of his autobiographies, nor did he apparently mention it to anyone else until telling the press in April 2008 that he knew more about foreign policy than John McCain and Hillary Clinton because he had visited Pakistan and knew the difference between Sunni and Shia Muslims. (That was an astoundingly arrogant and foolish remark, but that’s Obama.) Apparently, Obama didn’t want the trip to be known, which is quite suspicious. So why mention it then? Perhaps because the previous month, March 2008, three contract employees at the State Department were caught looking at Obama, McCain and Hillary Clinton’s passports. The firm one of the employees worked for, Analysis Corp., was headed by John O. Brennan who later became Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counter-TerrorismandeventuallyheadoftheCIA. Sowhyhad Obama never mentioned the trip to Pakistan? And why did he mention it just after someone who worked for Brennan was caught looking at his passport file? Were McCain and Clinton included just to confuse who the real target was?
One possibility is that the passport was being altered by the employee either to add, remove or replace information. What if the reason Obama never mentioned Pakistan is that he never actually went to Pakistan? All we have is Obama’s word for it that he visited Pakistan since his passport is not available. What if he went somewhere else in 1981? What if he went to the Soviet Union or some other east bloc country for training and that information had to be expunged and replaced by a cover story? If you look at the trade craft of Soviet moles and American traitors, they typically go overseas to meet their KGB handlers for instructions, which is why overseas travel is carefully scrutinized by those granting security clearances. Obama would never qualify for a security clearance, given his background and unexplained overseas travel.
Interestingly, Obama has gone overseas just before each major change in his life. And those changes were step ups in his status and ambition. In 1981, it was just before transferring from Occidental to Columbia. In 1988, he went to Europe and Kenya for several weeks just before heading to Harvard Law School. In 2006, he visited Kenya as a senator just before announcing his candidacy for president. And in 2008, he toured Europe as a candidate just before being elected president.
Is there a reason to suspect Obama may have become a mole? Aside from his communist revolutionary beliefs at the time, consider that two years after graduating from Columbia in New York City, Obama moved to Chicago in 1985, the previous home of his mentor Frank Marshall Davis, to become a community organizer. Obama’s ostensible reason for moving to Chicago was that he was inspired, he said, by the election of Harold Washington as mayor of that city. Washington was someone with close connections to the Communist Party and other socialist groups who backed him during his candidacy. So Obama said he applied for a job as community organizer with the Developing Communities Project.
Davis, who worked for most of his life in Chicago, was a member of the Communist Party USA, an organization actually funded from Moscow until 1989. In fact, the Communist Party USA was founded in Chicago back in 1919 and that city still has a very active Marxist culture. With the fall of the Soviet Union and the opening of KGB records, we know that some of the Chicago Communists were actually on Moscow’s payroll as agents of influence. And we also know that the Communist Party USA branch in Hawaii when Davis was living there was actually run from Moscow. From his time in Chicago, Davis always followed the propaganda line from Moscow in his writings and newspaper columns, no matter how ridiculous.
Presumably, then, he was a Soviet agent. Suppose Obama was groomed by Davis from youth to become a mole? Suppose that Davis told Moscow about his young charge, a bright kid who was so damaged by abandonment, so desperate to be important, and so lacking in moral upbringing as to be perfectly pliable? And even more important, the kid was already brainwashed to be a communist.
This was a kid who asked his schoolmates whether they would rather be a wealthy businessman, a military general or president of the United States. And when one answered businessman and the other military general, Obama told them he’d rather be president because the military general would protect him and the businessman would give him money. This was a kid who was seriously conflicted about his racial identity and finally decided he was black, suggesting that his mother and grandparent’s whiteness was associated with negative emotions of worthlessness and abandonment, while Davis’s black skin was associated with acceptance. It’s also probably how he became extraordinarily narcissistic. Obama is someone who has serious psychological issues.
After returning from his trip to Pakistan or wherever it was he actually went, Barack transferred to Columbia University, another far left institution, in New York after two years at Occidental, presumably under either an affirmative action or foreign student program since it’s unlikely Barack’s grades were stellar at Occidental where he admits he didn’t really study. According to one person who was at Columbia at the same time as Obama, that university very seldom accepted transfers from other schools and those were only the cream of the crop. So why Obama? Did someone among the school’s many communist administrators and professors arrange it under instructions from Moscow?
At this time, Obama said his ambition while at Columbia was to be a novelist, although if he ever wrote anything fiction, aside from some bad poetry, it hasn’t been disclosed. Considering the acclaim his writing skills for “Dreams From My Father” garnered, you’d think there would be some fictional works the would-be novelist wrote. But “Dreams From My Father” is sheer poetry and there’s nothing Obama has ever written (and there’s actually not much that he has written at all) even close to it in style or technical brilliance. Obama’s poetry is nothing exceptional, for example, and his essays are clunkers. It’s widely believed that Bill Ayers wrote the book since it contains scenes and depictions found in Ayers’ own stories. Moreover, Ayers keeps insisting in public that he actually wrote “Dreams From My Father” and jokes that if anyone can prove it he’ll split the royalties. Maybe that’s why Obama actually majored in political science and international relations.

10448545_1508480722700121_7099040129296781988_o
Why Ayers would write an autobiography for Obama isn’t known, but clearly, it was that book that convinced many people that Obama is a genius despite no other accomplishments. It may be that if Obama was being groomed for high office, Ayers was recruited by Moscow to provide Obama with a stellar biography and reputation.
The reason for going to Columbia is unclear, but as a hotbed of Marxism, perhaps that attracted Barack. Or it could be that his Soviet handlers decided he needed better credentials for future work and Columbia is prestigious enough. At Columbia, it seems few people can remember knowing Barack Obama. We do know he lived off campus with Pakistani roommate Sohale Siddiqi just a few blocks from where Bill Ayers lived at the time and that he attended socialist conferences at Cooper Union. Among his professors that later became close to him at Columbia we can count Khalid Rashidi, a pro- Palestinian activist. Perhaps it’s Obama’s upbringing as a Muslim in Indonesia that attracted him to foreign Muslim friends and led to sympathy for Islamic causes.
In 1985, then, Obama arrived in Chicago where he came to work with the communist/socialist network. His entre was probably Frank Marshall Davis, who apparently knew most of the people who would eventually help young Obama. But Obama’s immediate reason for being in Chicago, as previously indicated, was to become director of Developing Communities Project, a church-based community organizing group that he made a separate non-profit in 1986. While working for them, he sent a letter to Chicago mayor Harold Washington in 1987 asking for an endorsement for his organization. He listed as members of his board such people as Black (third world, actually) Liberation Theologists Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Pfleger, as well as John Ayers, the brother of unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers. Obama also worked for the Gamaliel Foundation as a “consultant and trainer” in the tactics of Saul “The Red” Alinsky, the author of “Rules for Radicals” whose book is dedicated to Lucifer. On the board of Gamaliel was professor John L. McKnight, who taught Obama Alinsky tactics probably starting in 1982 when Obama was still at Columbia and an intern for Gamaliel. (McKnight’s organization recruited 20 interns in 1982 for staffing in several cities, including New York.)
In his 1995 memoir, Obama said he wanted to go to Harvard Law School to “learn power’s currency in all its intricacy,” with the goal of “making large-scale change” as a national politician. So Obama approached McKnight to write a letter of recommendation, which he did. Obama, who McKnight admitted was a poor student, also probably got letters of recommendation from Newton Minow (JFK’s head of the FCC) who was on the board of trustees at Northwestern University where McKnight was teaching, and whose daughter, Martha, was dean of Harvard Law School. Minow was also a senior lawyer at Sidley Austin law firm where Obama did internships at Martha’s recommendation. Was sending Obama to that law firm a way to connect him with his future handler, Valerie Jarrett? Jarrett did work there at the time. Another letter of recommendation probably came from Thomas Ayers, the father of William Ayers, who was also on the board of trustees with Minow. Why were all these people so interested in helping a man with no particular accomplishments, even academically, into Harvard Law?
The wealthy Thomas Ayers, CEO of Consolidated Edison and sometimes called the Godfather of Chicago Politics, may have helped finance Obama’s education. According to Thomas Ayers’ mailman, Allen Hulton, he met young Obama at the home of Thomas Ayers. “He was very polite, dressed nicely, but informally – slacks and a dress shirt – and he spoke with no accent. Immediately this young black man entered into a conversation with me. He told me he had taken the train out from Chicago and had come to thank the Ayers family personally for having helped him with his education. “Hulton remembers asking the young man what his plans were for the future. “He looked at me and told me he was going to be president of the United States,” Hulton says. “There was a little bit of a grin on his face when he said it – he sounded sure of himself, but not arrogant. I know how people will say things because they have an ambition, but it did not come across that way,” Hulton says. “It came across as if this young black male was telling me he was going to be president, almost as if it were a
statement of a scientific fact that had already been predetermined, as if his being president has already been pre-arranged.”
Hulton also said that Thomas Ayers once gave him a lecture on how the working man was being exploited by rich capitalists. Was Thomas Ayers a Marxist? It certainly seems so. Why did Thomas Ayers take an interest in Barack Obama? Probably because one of Ayers’ close friends was the ubiquitous Frank Marshall Davis. It seems reasonable that Davis recommended Obama to Ayers and Ayers probably introduced Obama to his son, William, the Marxist terrorist.
In 1988 Obama left to attend Harvard Law School but returned to Chicago to work at Sidley Austin law firm in the summer 1989 where Valerie Jarrett introduced him to Michelle Robinson, his immediate boss who later became his wife. Not surprisingly, Jarrett’s maternal grandfather, Robert Rochon Taylor, was a Communist Party member and friend of Frank Marshall Davis. Her father-in-law, Vernon Jarrett, was also a communist and friend of Davis’s who apparently knew Khalid al-Mansour, formerly known as Donald Warden. Warden was a radical black power advocate and Marxist who was one of the “Chicago Eight” responsible for rioting during the 1968 Chicago Democratic Party convention.
Vernon Jarrett wrote an article in 1979 about al-Mansour, reporting that al-Mansour was asking rich Arabs to fund the education of black American kids, presumably to help induce them to become Muslims. So, perhaps Davis also prevailed upon his friend Vernon Jarrett to contact al-Mansour and recommend Obama as a candidate for that educational funding, especially since Obama was schooled in Islam while in Indonesia and his alleged Kenyan father’s family were Muslims. Sutton Percy, a New Yorker connected to Marxists there, said that al-Mansour asked him to write a letter of recommendation for Obama to Harvard Law, which Sutton did. Interestingly, in 1979, Obama was in Chicago. Did he meet with Vernon Jarrett or al- Mansour? My guess is that he did.
After law school, Valerie Jarrett initially worked for Mayor Harold Washington, another of Chicago’s communist officials who stocked his administration with communists and socialists. It was while she worked for Washington that she first hired Michelle Robinson who later married Barack Obama.
In 1991 Obama returned to Chicago after getting his law degree. He worked for ACORN’s Project Vote, and helped to elect another Chicago communist, Carol Moseley Braun, to the US Senate. In 1994, Obama became chief of staff for Alice Palmer in her run for a Congressional seat. Palmer was a communist and probably a paid agent of influence for the Soviet Union back in the 1980’s. In a 1995 party at the house of Bill Ayers to introduce Barack Obama’s entre into politics, Palmer anointed Obama as her heir to the Illinois Senate seat she was vacating. When Palmer’s Congressional bid fizzled, she wanted her old Illinois Senate seat back but Obama refused and had her disqualified on the ballot. Palmer, who fell out with Obama after that, later joined the socialist New Party of which Obama was also a member.
When Obama finally reached the White House, his closest advisor was Valerie Jarrett, who is still there and considered by some to be the actual power behind the throne who acts as Obama’s eyes and ears and, some say, brain. Perhaps her real mission is to keep an eye on Obama and direct policy. The other main advisor was David Axelrod who decamped for Chicago to run Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. Interestingly, Axelrod was mentored and taught politics by a member of the Communist Party USA, David Canter, who was probably a paid agent of the Soviet Union. Canter’s father Harry, was a committed communist who even moved his family to Moscow. When he returned to America he came to Chicago and worked, as you might have guessed, with Frank Marshall Davis.
So, to put it together, young Obama was more than likely turned into a communist by his mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, and his family, and then sent to Occidental, known for its far left climate. Sometime during this period, Obama was probably officially recruited by the Soviet KGB to be a mole. His 1981 trip abroad was probably to meet his Soviet handler and get further instructions, including what to study and who to meet at Columbia. His first connection with the Chicago communist network was by applying for an internship with Gamaliel Foundation and so it was natural for Obama to relocate to the old home of his mentor and start making connections with radical Marxists.

In 1988 he was probably instructed to go to law school, presumably the best that would accept him, and Davis made sure his contacts wrote letters of recommendation. That the daughter of Thomas Ayers was dean of Harvard Law probably made him a shoo-in even if he didn’t have distinguished grades at Columbia. Before going to Harvard, Obama went overseas again and likely met his Soviet handler for further instructions, including that he should enter politics and possibly run for president. Ayers and the Saudis probably financed Obama’s time at Harvard.
Obama’s connection with the Saudis, Palestinians and other Muslims was also probably deemed a plus by the Soviets and one of the benefits of recruiting him. Some people think Obama is a closet Muslim while others think he’s an atheist who joined the Rev. Wright’s church to gain “street cred.” But being so supportive of Islam provides cover since Obama is seen as a Muslim tool, not that of the Russians.
It was Martha Minow who greased Obama’s way into the Sidley Austin law firm where her father was employed and which was a hot bed of leftist sympathizers, including Bernadine Dohrn, the terrorist wife of William Ayers. First year law students virtually never get to intern at major law firms. While at that law firm, Jarrett probably became his American handler. (It would be interesting to see when and where Jarrett went overseas for vacations or business.) It’s also possible that Michelle Robinson was recruited to be his cover, to provide a respectable family image despite his alleged gay sex life and drug use, in return for her riding his coattails into the final objective, the White House. In fact, when Obama lost his first bid to be a congressman, she reportedly almost left him.
After graduation from law school, Obama returned again to Chicago and started his political activities, working on the campaigns of various communists or socialists, until he gained enough experience and “street cred” among the city’s black south side population to enter politics himself. He went up the political ladder as fast as possible, from being elected state senator in 1997 to being elected United States senator in 2004 (aided when Carol Mosely Braun stepped aside for him). In 2004, he gave an impressive speech at the Democratic Party convention which fueled speculation that he might be presidential timber. But he wisely said he wasn’t ready. In fact, on November 8, 2004, after his election as senator, Obama said, “You know, I am a believer in knowing what you’re doing when you apply for a job. And I think that if I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket, I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now there are some people who might be comfortable with that, but I’m not one of those people.” However, that reticence to run for the presidency lasted until February 2007, when he announced his candidacy for president after having served only two years as a senator.
In 2005, Obama was adopted as a protege by Republican senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, one of the few Repubicans who was a creature of the fascist manipulator George Soros. Lugar took Obama on an arms control inspection trip to Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan in 2005. No doubt there were plenty of opportunities to meet with Russian handlers (fascists now, not communists) including when the American party was detained for several hours for no good reason and Obama was confined alone to a room in the airport. In 2006, Obama went abroad again, to Kenya, and perhaps met again with a Russian handler.
Did his Russian handlers push him into aggressively pursuing the office despite his misgivings? Did Obama really expect to win the nomination then? Or was it a Russian ploy to “prove” that a racist America would never consider a black man for president and thereby embarrass us.? Is that why Michelle Obama, surprised that her husband was winning, said that for the first time in her adult life she was proud of her country? If they thought America was so bad, why make a hopeless run for president? In any case, why would the Russians want to embarrass the United States? After all, the Soviet Union disintegrated and ostensibly communism was defeated in 1991, so the Russians were supposed to be no longer a threat.
The foreign intelligence requirements of the new Russian government did not end, of course, with the demise of the Soviet Union, and the functions of the KGB still had to continue even if that organization didn’t. So the new Russian government still had the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). One of the methods the SVR uses to obtain information and influence is through moles, that is, people who are recruited at a young age, normally using ideological indoctrination, and then groomed to enter strategically useful occupations in sensitive positions when they reach adulthood. One recent example of this was the arrest in 2010 of ten Russian agents, the so-called “Illegals Program.” The ten agents were what Russians call “sleeper agents” or moles, who were educated to pass as Americans and then insinuate themselves into useful jobs.
The present Russian government is fascist by nature and has nationalistic ambitions. It is led by President Vladimir Putin, a former KGB official. To get an idea of what the Russians intend to achieve by the use of a mole as an influence agent, and why they still want to bring down the United States, consider the textbook, “Foundations of Geopolitics” written in 1997 by Alexander Dugin, a known fascist, and General Nikolai Klokotov of the military’s General Staff. The book is very popular with Russian national security and foreign policy officials and is used as a textbook by the General Staff Academy and other educational institutions. Klokotov stated that it would serve as a “mighty ideological foundation for preparing a new military command.”
The book declares that “the battle for the world rule of [ethnic] Russians” has not ended and Russia remains “the staging area of a new anti-bourgeois, anti-American revolution.” The Eurasian Empire will be constructed “on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us.”
It also states that Russia should use its special forces, including moles, within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, by, for example, provoking “Afro-American racists.” According to the book, Russia should “introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics.”
In June 2008, Obama beat out Hillary Clinton to win the Democratic Party nomination to run for president. One month later, Obama went abroad again, this time as the party’s nominee, as if there were voters out in Germany who needed persuading to vote for him. So why go abroad to campaign? Was the trip really a ploy to meet with his Russian handlers and receive more instructions on what they expected from him as president? Is the Obama program really directed from Moscow to further the agenda outlined in “Foundations of Geopolitics” book?
If you wonder how Obama could introduce “geopolitical disorder” into the United States, consider why Van Jones, an admitted communist who was recruited by Valerie Jarrett to be Obama’s “Green Jobs” czar wanted to take over the “Occupy Wall Street” movement. If you want to know why Obama encourages illegal immigration, appoints members of the Mexican separatist group “La Raza” to his administration, and tries to stop states from enforcing the borders, consider the above goals. If you want to know why Obama has brought so many members of the Muslim Brotherhood into his administration, consider the above goals. If you want to know why Obama is so racially divisive, consider the above goals. If you want to know why Obama is trying to wreck us financially, consider the above goals. If you wonder why leftists are encouraged to be as nasty as possible towards anyone on the right, further dividing the country, consider the above goals.

10336735_10152364141375359_5100705186748007042_n
As for America’s role in the world, Dugin and Klokotov’s book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: “the main ‘scapegoat’ will be precisely the U.S.” What’s more, they stress the “continental Russian-Islamic alliance” which lies “at the foundation of the anti-Atlanticist strategy.” The alliance is based on the “traditional character of Russian and Islamic civilization.” The book calls Iran a key ally and uses the term “Moscow-Tehran axis.”
So, if you want to know why Obama would insult our traditional Atlantic allies, such as the United Kingdom, while supporting our enemies, such as trying to force the Hondurans to disregard their own constitution and allow their president, an ally of Venezuela’s former dictator Chavez, to remain in office past his allowed two terms, consider the above objectives. If you wonder why Obama would tell Russia’s Medvedev that he would have more flexibility to meet Russian goals after he’s reelected, consider the above objectives.
Although it hasn’t been confirmed, the Israeli Avi Lipkin (also known as Victor Mordecai) claims that on January 19, 2010 his wife Rachel, a native born Egyptian Jew, picked up a broadcast on Nile TV from Egypt. It was a round table discussion in which the Foreign Minister of Egypt, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, was quoted saying that in a one-on- one meeting with Barack Obama, our president swore to him that he was a Muslim. Gheit, who did, indeed, meet privately with Obama in 2009, continued by saying Obama told him, “I have a problem with some domestic issues. And as soon as I finish with the healthcare question you Muslims will see what I will do for Islam regarding Israel.”
So, if you wonder why Obama in conjunction with his close friend, Turkey’s president Ergogan, as well as the Saudis, have been actively supporting the overthrow of secular regimes that were cooperating with us in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and now Syria, only to replace them with Muslim Brotherhood Islamists who are our enemies and are likely to go to war with Israel eventually, consider the above Russian objectives. If you wonder why Obama let our staff in Benghazi die rather than save them, while putting out an absurd lie that it was a mob attack provoked by a movie from months before that nobody had ever seen, then realize that promoting the idea that an American movie incited the mob is a meme they were trying to create designed to make the US the scapegoat, just as in the objectives above. If you wonder why Obama didn’t support Iran’s dissidents in 2009, consider whose key ally Tehran is.
If you wonder why Obama has not supported Ukrainian dissidents fighting to prevent closer ties to Moscow in 2014, or even criticized the crackdown against regime opponents in Venezuela by Chavez’s hand-picked successor, consider what Moscow’s interests are. If you wonder why Obama is so diffident towards Muslims and indifferent if not hostile to Christians, consider whose objectives are being met.
After overthrowing the Egyptian government of Mubarak and installing the Muslim Brotherhood’s Morsi, the Egyptian people rebelled and threw them out. Likewise, Obama has been supporting Muslim terrorists who slaughter Christians in Syria as they try to overthrow the pro-Iranian regime of Assad probably at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Turkey. (Obama has yet to criticize the anti- Christian pogrom by Syria’s rebels.) But the Syrian rebels are making no headway, so Obama tried to get US military forces to intervene on behalf of the rebels until the American public objected. His latest tactic seems to be a deception. By creating the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (or the Levant), ISIS, he’s created a false enemy. His alleged solution is to arm the Free Syrian Army, which has been fighting the Syrian regime, so that they’ll fight ISIS. He proposes training them in Saudi Arabia, the very regime that has been financing the overthrow of Syria’s Assad, so that they’ll go after ISIS instead. But there’s no reason to believe the Free Syrian Army, which is composed of Islamists such as al-Qa’ida and the Muslim Brotherhood, will ignore Syria and battle fellow Muslims. Instead, they are likely to combine with ISIS and battle with US supplied arms.
As previously indicated, Obama is a close friend of Turkey’s President Erdogan, an Islamist whose party has pushed that country from being secular into embracing Islam as policy. Initially, Obama, Erdogan, the Saudis and probably George Soros were working together against Russia’s unofficial ally, Iran, but it appears that Obama has betrayed the Saudis, much to their fury, by making a deal with Iran to let them have a nuclear weapons program. Moreover, Turkey’s intelligence service betrayed Iranian dissidents to Tehran who were providing intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program. So, Obama and Turkey are now, along with the Russians, in bed with Iran. Why? Possibly because their program to overthrow Syria and replace Assad with a Sunni Islamic Brotherhood regime is failing, and Egypt is no longer an ally against Israel that it was under Morsi. So now, the only option to destroy Israel is nuclear and for that, they need Iran.
What else could Obama do for the Russians? While at Columbia, Obama wrote an article for a newspaper and also a class paper on nuclear disarmament, blaming the arms race entirely on the United States. Interestingly, nuclear disarmament of the West was a prime objective of the Soviet Union at the time. Nuclear disarmament is still one of Obama’s main interests and he’s done much to reduce the size of the American arsenal if not that of the Russians. According to President Obama, the United States has a moral obligation to disarm as an example to the rest of the world. His 2010 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty calls for the US to reduce our number of nuclear weapons to about 1550 while also agreeing not to create a missile defense shield in eastern Europe. The Russians must be very pleased.
As of 2013, he’s trying to reduce the number of nuclear weapons even more, to less than a thousand. American weapons, that is. The Russians are actually allowed to build more nuclear weapons since they say they have less than 1550 nuclear weapons and are busy modernizing their arsenal, something we’re not doing. If this sounds like an ideal situation for the Russians, Obama has given the Defense Department orders to plan on reducing our nuclear arsenal even further, down to 300 weapons. Bear in mind that even if you could get to a world where everyone lacked nuclear weapons and couldn’t build them, even the Chinese, Pakistanis, North Koreans, Israelis and Iranians, that would only make the world safe for large-scale conventional war.
Obama has also been firing and replacing flag-ranked officers in unprecedented numbers, leading some to believe that he’s putting his own compliant officers in key positions based on their willingness to open fire on Americans. Some of these key officers were responsible for America’s strategic nuclear forces. What’s more, many Air Force personnel manning the ICBM silos have been accused of various crimes and relieved as a result. Note that all of these people had to obtain a top secret clearance as a result of a comprehensive background investigation. How is it so many are deemed corrupt? Is Obama rendering our nuclear retaliatory capability prostrate?
In addition, he’s stopped several weapons programs such as the Tomahawk Cruise Missile and the Hellfire anti-personnel missiles, as well as drastically reduced the size of the Navy and the number of Army personnel. But he’s also allowed and encouraged illegal aliens to join America’s services at the same time. It should be obvious that Obama is striving to degrade America’s military, which works to the advantage of the Russians.
In America, Obama has been working to undermine the Constitution as he rules by the fiat of executive orders and unilaterally changing laws and deciding which ones to enforce. His economic policies of driving up government debt by many trillions of dollars and creating a welfare state have the earmarks of a Cloward-Piven strategy. (Cloward and Piven devised a plan to bankrupt New York by enlisting as many people as possible to go on welfare. The idea was to destroy the economy and replace it with a socialist state. In fact, they did manage to bankrupt New York City as a result.)
Obama is also working to bring vast numbers of Middle Eastern people into America without even vetting them. Many are likely to be terrorists and many have disappeared once they arrive in this country. He has created the crisis on the border with the massive wave of Central American’s entering this country along the Rio Grande in Texas. Many are vicious gang members and many are sick with a variety of dangerous diseases. Once inside this country, these dangerous people are shipped to locations the administration won’t disclose or simply let loose. It may be that the spread of the severe respiratory Enterovirus D68 that has polio-like symptoms is being spread by Central American children.
In October 2014, America had its first Ebola victim, so it may get much worse. The form of Ebola is far more contagious than previous strains and some believe it may be a weaponized version since the US government has a patent on it. What’s more, Disaster Response Teams reportedly were told months in advance that there would be a disaster in the coming October that would overwhelm EMT and Hospitals. Perhaps that’s true since the administration ordered 160,000 Hazmat suits. What else do we know? Obama put the Center for Disease Control directly under the White House. He also gutted quarantine rules that would help prevent pandemics from entering this country. So, what are the odds that Obama is part of a plot to ravage this country’s population?
If you wanted to allow terrorists into America carrying dirty bombs or chemical weapons, leaving the border unguarded or preventing Border Patrol Agents from defending themselves against assaults would also be s. In fact, that’s being done since Border Patrol personnel are being diverted to Texas. Meanwhile, not only are Central Americans flooding in, but reports indicate a wide variety of other nationalities are joining them, including Islamists.
Interestingly, the Russian Mafia is said to be in charge in Mexico. Presumably, they’re coordinating with Mexican drug gangs and it may be that Putin is behind the plan. Imagine what would happen if America were destroyed by several plagues, such as Ebola or some exotic disease, along with attacks by terrorists. I suspect that, too, is part of the Russian’s plan that Obama appears to be supporting.
The scandals associated with Obama are also an indication of his contempt for America. He directed the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to not grant tax free status to conservative groups and Obama’s critics are being audited. The National Security Agency (NSA) is now monitoring virtually all communications by Americans in this country, which used to be illegal. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is sending monitors into news rooms to see how they devise editorial policy. Obama, under the Fast and Furious program, has sent thousands of firearms to Mexican drug cartels. Then there’s the Benghazi debacle which looks more and more like a plot to ship American weapons from Libya to Syria that was intercepted by Hamas.
Obama has also been laying the ground work to create a martial law crackdown on right wing opponents. His Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been buying billions of rounds of ammunition, giving away armored vehicles to police forces, buying armored check point stations and thousands of automatic weapons. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has contracted to build “refugee” camps that resemble prisons with inward facing barbed- wire fences. The Army has a field manual that directs how to run such a camp, including political indoctrination and keeping track of inmates by social security number. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) has provisions for the indefinite detention of American citizens in such camps under any pretext. Obama’s executive orders allow him to seize control of all utilities and transportation in this country even in time of peace. The Army and DHS have been practicing urban warfare exercises within large American cities and have recently constructed a mock US city to practice on. Army exercises and manuals stress that the terrorists are likely to be those who want to uphold the Constitution and display other conservative values. Clearly, something sinister is up.

10155237_676844005687418_2971614967135278225_n
Obama appears to be deliberately instituting a fascist regime in America. Fascism is a way station on the road from Capitalism to Communism. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is wrecking the economy, sowing chaos in the health care industry, adding to debt, depriving people of insurance or driving up their costs drastically, throwing people out of work and putting one-sixth of the US economy directly under the thumb of the government. And it’s not by nationalizing the healthcare industry, it’s by micromanaging it. That’s the difference between socialism and fascism. When the government directly takes over the healthcare industry as the single payer, then it will be socialized medicine. Until then, it’s fascist medicine.
In the end, we still don’t know who Obama really is. His birth certificate is a proven fraud. His draft card is clearly a fake. His social security numbers (he has many) are from a state he never lived in. His academic, government and health records are all sealed and he has spent millions to ensure they can’t be opened. Isn’t it possible, if not probable, that Obama is a mole?
Obama was famously overheard on a hot mic when he told Russia’s then President Medvedev (he was holding the spot for Vladimir Putin who was Prime Minister since Putin, Russia’s real boss, couldn’t run for president again under the Russian constitution) that he needed more space to solve the missile defense issue and that he would be more flexible after his next and last election (in 2012). Medvedev said, “I will transmit this information to Vladimir and I stand with you.” The press has largely ignored the familiar use of Vladimir rather than saying “Putin” or even just “the prime minister”, but more importantly, they’ve also failed to comment on why Medvedev would say, “I stand with you.” Doesn’t that imply that Medvedev knows Obama stands with him?
Now then, if you want to know how Russia could ever achieve the objective, “strategic control of the USA”, consider why they would put a mole in the White House.
By the way, as I usually do, I asked the universe for a sign as to whether this hypothesis is correct. Later that evening, I was walking past the TV as my wife was watching NCIS. I was taken aback when I heard a black character on the show state that he wasn’t really an American. He was from Somalia and was trained by the Soviets in Russia to become an American mole. He said the Russians dropped him off from a submarine near Seattle. I presume the producers of the show were hinting at Obama or using him as a model, but I was amazed at the timing of when and how I saw it.

Content copyright 20152015. . All rights reserved.

10321741_10152454140358189_8213125452691970229_o

42 ADMITTED FALSE FLAG ATTACKS IN THIS CRUMMY WORLD!!!

“Governments from Around the World Admit They Do It

page1image1920

Image Credits: Jonathan Perera / Flickr

by WASHINGTON’S BLOG | FEBRUARY 9, 2015

There are many documented false flag attacks, where a government carries out a terror attack … and then falsely blames its enemy for political purposes.
In the following 42 instances, officials in the government which carried out the attack (or seriously proposed an attack) admits to it, either orally or in writing:
(1) Japanese troops set off a small explosion on a train track in 1931, and falsely blamed it on China in order to justify an invasion of Manchuria. This is known as the “Mukden Incident” or the “Manchurian Incident”. The Tokyo International Military Tribunal found: “Several of the participators in the plan, including Hashimoto [a high-ranking Japanese army officer], have on various occasionsadmitted their part in the plot and have stated that the object of the ‘Incident’ was to afford an excuse for the occupation of Manchuria by the Kwantung Army ….” And see this.

(2) A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that – under orders from the chief of the Gestapo – he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.
(3) Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann
Goering admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building in 1933, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson.
(4) Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev admitted in writing that the Soviet Union’s Red Army shelled the Russian village of Mainila in 1939 – while blaming the attack on Finland – as a basis for launching the “Winter War” against Finland. Russian president Boris Yeltsin agreed that Russia had been the aggressor in the Winter War.
(5) The Russian Parliament, current Russian president Putin and former Soviet leader Gorbachev
all admit that Soviet leader Joseph Stalin ordered his secret police to execute 22,000 Polish army officers and civilians in 1940, and falsely blame it on the Nazis.
(6) The British government admits that – between 1946 and 1948 – it bombed 5 ships carrying Jews attempting to flee the Holocaust to seek safety in Palestine, set up a fake group called “Defenders of Arab Palestine”, and then had the psuedo-group falsely claim responsibility for the bombings (and
seethis, this and this).
(7) Israel admits that in 1954, an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind “evidence” implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this).
(8) The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister.
(9) The Turkish Prime Minister admitted that the Turkish government carried out the 1955 bombing on a Turkish consulate in Greece – also damaging the nearby birthplace of the founder of modern Turkey – and blamed it on Greece, for the purpose of inciting and justifying anti-Greek violence.
(10) The British Prime Minister admitted to his defense secretary that he and American president Dwight Eisenhower approved a plan in 1957 to carry out attacks in Syria and blame it on the Syrian government as a way to effect regime change.
(11) The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian
counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and other European countries in the 1950s and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security” (and see this) (Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred). And watch this BBC special. They also allegedly carried out terror attacks in France, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the UK, and other countries.
(12) In 1960, American Senator George Smathers suggested that the U.S. launch “a false attack made on Guantanamo Bay which would give us the excuse of actually fomenting a fight which would then give us the excuse to go in and [overthrow Castro]“.
(13) Official State Department documents show that, in 1961, the head of the Joint Chiefs and other high- level officials discussed blowing up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an invasion of that country. The plans were not carried out, but they were all discussed as serious proposals.
(14) As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in 1962, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.
(15) In 1963, the U.S. Department of Defense wrote a paper promoting attacks on nations within the Organization of American States – such as Trinidad-Tobago or Jamaica – and then falsely blaming them on Cuba.
(16) The U.S. Department of Defense even suggested covertly paying a person in the Castro government to attack the United States: “The only area remaining for consideration then would be to bribe one of Castro’s subordinate commanders to initiate an attack on Guantanamo.”
(17) The NSA admits that it lied about what really happened in the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for the Vietnam war.
(18) A U.S. Congressional committee admitted that – as part of its “Cointelpro” campaign – the FBI had used many provocateurs in the 1950s through 1970s to carry out violent acts and falsely blame them on political activists.
(19) A top Turkish general admitted that Turkish forces burned down a mosque on Cyprus in the 1970s and blamed it on their enemy. He explained: “In Special War, certain acts of sabotage are staged and blamed on the enemy to increase public resistance. We did this on Cyprus; we even burnt down a mosque.” In response to the surprised correspondent’s incredulous look the general said, “I am giving an example”.
(20) The German government admitted (and see this) that, in 1978, the German secret service detonated a bomb in the outer wall of a prison and planted “escape tools” on a prisoner – a member of the Red Army Faction – which the secret service wished to frame the bombing on.
(21) A Mossad agent admits that, in 1984, Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Gaddaffi’s compound in Tripoli, Libya which broadcast fake terrorist trasmissions recorded by Mossad, in order to frame Gaddaffi as a terrorist supporter. Ronald Reagan bombed Libya immediately thereafter.
(22) The South African Truth and Reconciliation Council found that, in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him “to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the investigating officer into the murder incident”, thus framing the ANC for the bombing.
(23) An Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian army admit that, in the 1990s, the Algerian army frequently massacred Algerian civilians and then blamed Islamic militants for the killings (and
see this video; and Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, French Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author).
(24) An Indonesian fact-finding team investigated violent riots which occurred in 1998, and determined that “elements of the military had been involved in the riots, some of which were deliberately provoked”.
(25) Senior Russian Senior military and intelligence officers admit that the KGB blew up Russian apartment buildings in 1999 and falsely blamed it on Chechens, in order to justify an invasion of Chechnya (and
see this report and this discussion).
(26) According to the Washington Post, Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist organization.
(27) The well-respected former Indonesian president also admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings.
(28) As reported by BBC, the New York Times, and Associated Press, Macedonian officials admit that the government murdered 7 innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order to join the “war on terror”.
(29) Senior police officials in Genoa, Italy admitted that – in July 2001, at the G8 summit in Genoa – planted two Molotov cocktails and faked the stabbing of a police officer, in order to justify a violent crackdown against protesters.
(30) Although the FBI now admits that the 2001 anthrax attacks were carried out by one or more U.S. government scientists, a senior FBI official says that the FBI was actually told to blame the Anthrax attacks on Al Qaeda by White House officials (remember what the anthrax letters looked like). Government officials also confirm that the white House tried to link the anthrax to Iraq as a justification for regime change in that country.
(31) Similarly, the U.S. falsely blamed Iraq for playing a role in the 9/11 attacks – as shown by amemo from the defense secretary – as one of the main justifications for launching the Iraq war. Even after the 9/11 Commission admitted that there was no connection, Dick Cheney said that the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein’s regime, that Cheney “probably” had information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties. Top U.S. government officials now admit that the Iraq war was really launched for oil … not 9/11 or weapons of mass destruction (despite previous “lone wolf” claims, many U.S. government officials now say that 9/11 was state-sponsored terror; but Iraq was not the state which backed the hijackers).
(32) Former Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”
(33) United Press International reported in June 2005:
(34) Undercover Israeli soldiers admitted in 2005 to throwing stones at other Israeli soldiers so they could blame it on Palestinians, as an excuse to crack down on peaceful protests by the Palestinians.
(35) Quebec police admitted that, in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest were actually undercover Quebec police officers (and see this).
(36) At the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of parliament saw plain clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence.
(37) Egyptian politicians admitted (and see this) that government employees looted priceless museum artifacts in 2011 to try to discredit the protesters.
(38) A Colombian army colonel has admitted that his unit murdered 57 civilians, then dressed them in uniforms and claimed they were rebels killed in combat.
(39) The highly-respected writer for the Telegraph Ambrose Evans-Pritchard says that the head of Saudi intelligence – Prince Bandar – recently admitted that the Saudi government controls “Chechen” terrorists.
(40) High-level American sources admitted that the Turkish government – a fellow NATO country – carried out the chemical weapons attacks blamed on the Syrian government; and high-ranking Turkish
government admitted on tape plans to carry out attacks and blame it on the Syrian government.
(41) The former Ukrainian security chief admits that the sniper attacks which started the Ukrainian coup were carried out in order to frame others.
(42) Britain’s spy agency has admitted (and see this) that it carries out “digital false flag” attacks on targets, framing people by writing offensive or unlawful material … and blaming it on the target.
In addition, two-thirds of the City of Rome burned down in a huge fire on July 19, 64 A.D. The Roman people blamed the Emperor Nero for starting the fire. Some top Roman leaders – including the Roman consul Cassius Dio, as well as historians like Suetonius – agreed that Nero started the fire (based largely on the fact that the Roman Senate had just rejected Nero’s application to clear 300 acres in Rome so that he could build a palatial complex, and that the fire allowed him to build his complex). Regardless of who actually started the fire, Nero – in the face of public opinion accusing him of arson – falsely blamed theChristians for starting the fire. He then rounded up and brutally tortured and murdered scores of Christians for something they likely didn’t do.
We didn’t include this in the list above, because – if Nero did start the fire on purpose – he did it for hisown reasons (to build his palatial complex), and not for geopolitical reasons benefiting his nation.
So Common … There’s a Name for It
The use of the bully’s trick is so common that it was given a name hundreds of years ago.
“False flag terrorism” is defined as a government attacking its own people, then blaming others in order to justify going to war against the people it blames. Or as Wikipedia defines it:
U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.
The term comes from the old days of wooden ships, when one ship would hang the flag of its enemy before attacking another ship. Because the enemy’s flag, instead of the flag of the real country of the attacking ship, was hung, it was called a “false flag” attack.
Indeed, this concept is so well-accepted that rules of engagement for naval, air and land warfare all prohibit false flag attacks.
Leaders Throughout History Have Acknowledged False Flags
Leaders throughout history have acknowledged the danger of false flags:
“A history of false flag attacks used to manipulate the minds of the people! “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler
“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.
“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin”

The train we’re on is now running downhill without brakes …

10897960_10203708018125193_2345684501439389911_n

CRUMMY $ COLLAPSE COMING!

TAKE HEED AND PREPARE!

THE FISCAL TRAIN IS APPROACHING THE CLIFF!

obama-debt-train

http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/the-dollar-collapse-not-whether-but-when/#d8QvylIpuMOphfiv.99

THE DOLLAR COLLAPSE: NOT WHETHER, BUT WHEN

Exclusive: Lord Monckton explains what’ll happen when the crunch finally comes

Published: 7-30-2013

cmonckton_avatar  LORD MONCKTON

Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, high priest of climate skepticism, advised Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, wrote leaders for the Yorkshire Post, was editor of the Catholic paper The Universe, managing editor of the Telegraph Sunday Magazine, assistant editor of Today, and consulting editor of the Evening Standard. He invented the million-selling “Eternity Puzzles,” “Sudoku X” and a promising treatment for infections. See the Science & Public Policy Institute.

monckton_logob

I make no apology for repeating my warning that, thanks to the dismal Obama administration, Uncle Sam is bankrupt. Serious financial commentators are now predicting riots in the streets and even, perhaps, outright economic collapse.

The U.S. dollar, the world’s reserve currency for almost half a century, is its reserve currency no more. Each dollar bill the administration prints is just as much a forgery as that bogus Hawaiian birth certificate.

Every two months, the administration prints or borrows more money than the combined annual profits of the 100 biggest publicly traded companies in America.

Every second, the U.S. government spends $64,000 it doesn’t have. The $64,000 Question is not whether but when the collapse will come. The crash of 2008 was a walk in the park. This is the big one. And the frankly communist outlook of the current administration means it is temperamentally disinclined to take any of the steps that are now essential to save America.

Trouble is, the GOP have little or nothing to say about this. For 10 successive suspicious weeks, U.S. federal debt has remained at just under $17 trillion, just under the debt ceiling set by your elected representatives in Congress.

Yeah, right. Dream on. The Treasury is fiddling the books. Fraudulently. According to my calculations, federal debt has risen not by zero but by $400 billion in those 70 days.

Here is just one of the ways the Treasury can get away with making $400 billion vanish. Under an act intended to allow officials to mint commemorative coins (not exactly a legitimate function of the Treasury), the Secretary Jack Lew can issue platinum coins of any denomination he wants.

To keep the debt apparently below the congressional limit even though it is rising at $40 billion a week, all he has to do is mint a half-ounce coin with a face value of $2 trillion and deposit it with the Fed.

Bingo! Not just 70 days’ squandering but a whole year’s socialist profligacy fully “paid for,” just like that. And Congress none the wiser.

I don’t know whether this is how Lew is cooking the books. I don’t know how he’s cooking them. But I do know that he’s cooking them. You don’t need to have a Ph.D. in macroeconomics to work that one out.

I am angry – and I’m not even a U.S. citizen. Every red-blooded American should be furious when in-your-face corruption as outrageous as this prevails at the highest level in the institution whose job is to account for your money honestly.

Today the U.S. has more government debt than any country in the history of the world. More debt than every country in the European Union – combined.

To minimize the interest on all that debt, the Fed has lowered its benchmark interest rate 10 times since August 2007, from 5.25 percent to somewhere between 0 and 0.25 percent. But it can’t go on doing that, because worldwide no one believes in the dollar. So interest rates are going to have to go up.

Porter Stansberry, an investment expert based in Baltimore, explains what will happen then: “What if the average real interest rate ends up being just 4 percent and we pay it off over 30 years, like a mortgage? We’ll spend $34.3 trillion just to repay what we owe right now. If the rate ends up being 6 percent, we’ll spend $43.1 trillion.”

The crunch will come when Uncle Sam’s creditors either completely stop accepting dollars in repayment or greatly discount the value of these new dollars.

The New York Post puts it this way: “The U.S. dollar is getting perilously close to losing its status as the world’s reserve currency. Should it cross the line, the 2008 financial crisis could look like a summer storm.” The Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal have said the same.

Sam Zell, America’s 60th richest man, says this: “My single biggest financial concern is the loss of the dollar as the reserve currency. I can’t imagine anything more disastrous to our country. I’m hoping against hope that it ain’t gonna happen, but you’re already seeing things in the markets that are suggesting that confidence in the dollar is waning. I think you could see a 25 percent reduction in the standard of living in this country if the U.S. dollar was no longer the world’s reserve currency. That’s how valuable it is.”

The Chinese, via the official Xinhua news agency, have said: “International supervision over the issue of U.S. dollars should be introduced and a new, stable and secured global reserve currency may also be an option to avert catastrophe caused by any single country.”

James Rickards, the author of “Currency Wars,” says this: “If the currency collapses, everything else goes with it: Stocks, bonds, commodities, derivatives and other investments are all priced in a nation’s currency. If you destroy the currency, you destroy all markets – and the nation.”

You heard it here first.

Receive Lord Christopher Monckton’s commentaries in your email

BONUS: By signing up for Lord Christopher Monckton’s alerts, you will also be signed up for news and special offers from WND via email.

  • Name*FirstLast
  • Email*
    Where we will email your daily updates
  • Postal code*
    A valid zip code or postal code is required
  • Click the button below to sign up for Lord Christopher Monckton’s commentaries by email, and keep up to date with special offers from WND. You may change your email preferences at any time.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/the-dollar-collapse-not-whether-but-when/#AjPjVyPfte1RuJYK.99

We The People Need To Stop The Train –

Before It TOTALLY Wrecks Our Country And Our Lives!

424816_4932875727977_1581409282_n

THESE ARE THE CRUMBS THAT RUINED US FINANCIALLY!

Two of the Best Explanations of the Federal Reserve System

(which is neither Federal nor reserved)

THAT I HAVE EVER READ!!!

The Federal Reserve is how the elites will be able to rule us and make us part of their new world order! The schematic below explains how all the political and financial machinations  work and have worked for the past 100 years!

They will continue to work until we the people say enough!

hegalian-dialectic

The article, which is from the book, “The Beginning of The End”, was published in 2010, so the debt figures are grossly out if date, but you should know by now, that we are almost $17 TRILLION DOLLARS in debt and if the 2009 figures made the debt unpayable, you may as well forget about ever paying off the debt that exists now! Read these two explanations to understand what the yokes are that bind us down and the only way we will ever be able to become debt free is to close down the Federal Reserve, tear up our debt to them, which they caused, and give the money making power back to Congress, the way it was set up in the Constitution!

It Is Now Mathematically Impossible To Pay Off The U.S. National Debt

 By Michael Snyder, on February 4th, 2010

 http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/it-is-now-mathematically-impossible-to-pay-off-the-u-s-national-debt

A lot of people are very upset about the rapidly increasing U.S. national debt these days and they are  demanding a solution. What they don’t realize is that there simply is not a solution under the current U.S. financial system. It is now mathematically impossible for the U.S. government to pay off the U.S. national debt. You see, the truth is that the U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exist. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt. And if they did that, obviously American society would stop functioning because nobody would have any money to buy or sell anything.

And the U.S. government would still be massively in debt.

So why doesn’t the U.S. government just fire up the printing presses and print a bunch of money to pay off the debt?

Well, for one very simple reason.

That is not the way our system works.

You see, for more dollars to enter the system, the U.S. government has to go into more debt.

The U.S. government does not issue U.S. currency – the Federal Reserve does.

The Federal Reserve is a private bank owned and operated for profit by a very powerful group of elite international bankers.

If you will pull a dollar bill out and take a look at it, you will notice that it says “Federal Reserve Note” at the top.

It belongs to the Federal Reserve.

The U.S. government cannot simply go out and create new money whenever it wants under our current system.

Instead, it must get it from the Federal Reserve.

So, when the U.S. government needs to borrow more money (which happens a lot these days) it goes over to the Federal Reserve and asks them for some more green pieces of paper called Federal Reserve Notes.

The Federal Reserve swaps these green pieces of paper for pink pieces of paper called U.S. Treasury bonds. The Federal Reserve either sells these U.S. Treasury bonds or they keep the bonds for themselves (which happens a lot these days).

So that is how the U.S. government gets more green pieces of paper called “U.S. dollars” to put into circulation. But by doing so, they get themselves into even more debt which they will owe even more interest on.

So every time the U.S. government does this, the national debt gets even bigger and the interest on that debt gets even bigger.

Are you starting to get the picture?

As you read this, the U.S. national debt is approximately 12 trillion dollars, although it is going up so rapidly that it is really hard to pin down an exact figure.

So how much money actually exists in the United States today?

Well, there are several ways to measure this.

The “M0” money supply is the total of all physical bills and currency, plus the money on hand in bank vaults and all of the deposits those banks have at reserve banks.  As of mid-2009, the Federal Reserve said that this amount was about 908 billion dollars.

The “M1” money supply includes all of the currency in the “M0” money supply, along with all of the money held in checking accounts and other checkable accounts at banks, as well as all money contained in travelers’ checks.  According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 1.7 trillion dollars in December 2009, but not all of this money actually “exists” as we will see in a moment.

The “M2” money supply includes everything in the “M1” money supply plus most other savings accounts, money market accounts, retail money market mutual funds, and small denomination time deposits (certificates of deposit of under $100,000).  According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 8.5 trillion dollars in December 2009, but once again, not all of this money actually “exists” as we will see in a moment.

The “M3” money supply includes everything in the “M2” money supply plus all other CDs (large time deposits and institutional money market mutual fund balances), deposits of eurodollars and repurchase agreements.  The Federal Reserve does not keep track of M3 anymore, but according to ShadowStats.com it is currently somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 trillion dollars.  But again, not all of this “money” actually “exists” either.

So why doesn’t it exist?

It is because our financial system is based on something called fractional reserve banking.

When you go over to your local bank and deposit $100, they do not keep your $100 in the bank.  Instead, they keep only a small fraction of your money there at the bank and they lend out the rest to someone else.  Then, if that person deposits the money that was just borrowed at the same bank, that bank can loan out most of that money once again.  In this way, the amount of “money” quickly gets multiplied.  But in reality, only $100 actually exists.  The system works because we do not all run down to the bank and demand all of our money at the same time.

According to the New York Federal Reserve Bank, fractional reserve banking can be explained this way….

If the reserve requirement is 10%, for example, a bank that receives a $100 deposit may lend out $90 of that deposit. If the borrower then writes a check to someone who deposits the $90, the bank receiving that deposit can lend out $81. As the process continues, the banking system can expand the initial deposit of $100 into a maximum of $1,000 of money($100+$90+81+$72.90+…=$1,000).”

So much of the “money” out there today is basically made up out of thin air.

In fact, most banks have no reserve requirements at all on savings deposits, CDs and certain kinds of money market accounts.  Primarily, reserve requirements apply only to “transactions deposits” – essentially checking accounts.

The truth is that banks are freer today to dramatically “multiply” the amounts deposited with them than ever before.  But all of this “multiplied” money is only on paper – it doesn’t actually exist.

The point is that the broadest measures of the money supply (M2 and M3) vastly overstate how much “real money” actually exists in the system.

So if the U.S. government went out today and demanded every single dollar from all banks, businesses and individuals in the United States it would not be able to collect 14 trillion dollars (M3) or even 8.5 trillion dollars (M2) because those amounts are based on fractional reserve banking.

So the bottom line is this….

#1) If all money owned by all American banks, businesses and individuals was gathered up today and sent to the U.S. government, there would not be enough to pay off the U.S. national debt.

#2) The only way to create more money is to go into even more debt which makes the problem even worse.

You see, this is what the whole Federal Reserve System was designed to do.  It was designed to slowly drain the massive wealth of the American people and transfer it to the elite international bankers.

It is a game that is designed so that the U.S. government cannot win.  As soon as they create more money by borrowing it, the U.S. government owes more than what was created because of interest.

If you owe more money than ever was created you can never pay it back.

That means perpetual debt for as long as the system exists.

It is a system designed to force the U.S. government into ever-increasing amounts of debt because there is no escape.

We could solve this problem by shutting down the Federal Reserve and restoring the power to issue U.S. currency to the U.S. Congress (which is what the U.S. Constitution calls for).  But the politicians in Washington D.C. are not about to do that.

So unless you are willing to fundamentally change the current system, you might as well quit complaining about the U.S. national debt because it is now mathematically impossible to pay it off.

***UPDATE***

It has been suggested that the same dollar can be used to pay off debt over and over – this is theoretically true as long as the dollar remains in the system.

For example, if the U.S. government gives China a dollar to pay off a debt, there is a good chance that the U.S. government will be able to acquire that dollar again and use it to pay off another debt.

However, this is not true when debt is retired with the Federal Reserve.  In that case, money is actually removed from the system.  In fact, because of the “money multiplier”, when debt is retired with the Federal Reserve it can remove ten times that amount of money (and actually more, but let’s not get too technical) from the system.

You see, fractional reserve banking works both ways.  When $100 is introduced into the system, it can theoretically create $1000 as the example in the article above demonstrates.  However, when that $100 is removed, it can have the opposite impact.

And considering the fact that the Federal Reserve “purchased” the vast majority of new U.S. government debt last year, we have got a real mess on our hands.

Even if a way could be figured out how to pay off all the debt we owe to foreign nations (such as China, Japan, etc.) it would still be mathematically impossible to pay off the debt that we owe to the Federal Reserve which is exploding so fast that it is hard to even keep track of.

Of course we could repudiate that debt and shut down the Federal Reserve, but very few in Washington D.C. have any interest in doing that.

It has also been suggested that instead of just using dollars to pay off the U.S. national debt, we could use the assets of the U.S. government to pay it off.

That is rather extreme, but let us consider that for a moment.

That total value of all physical assets in the United States, both publicly and privately owned, is somewhere in the neighborhood of 45 to 50 trillion dollars.  Of course the idea of the U.S. government “owning” every single asset of the American people is repugnant to our entire way of life, but let’s assume that for a moment.

According to the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government, which is an official United States government report, the total liabilities of the United States government, including future social security and medicare payments that the U.S. government is already committed to pay out, now exceed 65 TRILLION dollars.  This amount is more than the entire GDP of the whole world.

In fact, there are other authors who have written that the actual figure for the future liabilities of the U.S. government should be much higher, but let’s be conservative and go with 65 trillion for now.

So, if the U.S. government took control of all physical assets in the United States and sold them off, it could not even make enough money to pay for everything that the U.S. government is already on the hook for.

Ouch.

If you have not read the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government, you really should.  Actually the 2009 report should be available very soon if it isn’t already.  If anyone knows if it is available, please let us know.

The truth is that the U.S. government is in much bigger financial trouble than we have been led to believe.

For example, according to the report (which remember is an official U.S. government report) the real U.S. budget deficit for 2008 was not 455 billion dollars.  It was actually 5.1 trillion dollars.

So why the difference?

The CBO’s 455 billion figure is based on cash accounting, while the 5.1 trillion figure in the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government is based on GAAP accounting. GAAP accounting is what is used by all the major firms on Wall Street and it is regarded as a much more accurate reflection of financial reality.

So needless to say, the United States is in a financial mess of unprecedented magnitude.

So what should we do?  Does anyone have any suggestions?

***UPDATE 2***

We have received a lot of great comments on this article.  Trying to understand the U.S. financial system (even after studying it for years) can be very difficult at times.  In fact, it can almost seem like playing 3 dimensional chess.

Several readers have correctly pointed out that when the U.S. money supply is expanded by the Federal Reserve, the interest that is to be paid on that new debt is not created.

So where does the money to pay that interest come from?  Well, eventually the money supply has to be expanded some more.  But that creates even more debt.

That brings us to the next point.

Several readers have insisted that the Federal Reserve is not privately owned and that since it returns “most” of the profits it makes to the U.S. government that we should not be concerned about the debt owed to it.

The truth is that what you have with the Federal Reserve is layers of ownership.  The following was originally posted on the Federal Reserve’s website….

“The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized much like private corporations – possibly leading to some confusion about “ownership.” For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.”

So Federal Reserve “stock” is owned by member banks.  So who owns the member banks?  Well, when you sift through additional layers of ownership, you will ultimately find that people like the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers and the Queen of England have very large ownership interests in the big banks.  But there are so many layers of ownership that they are able to disguise themselves well.

You see, these people are not stupid.  They did not become the richest people in the world by being morons.  It was the banking elite of the world who designed the Federal Reserve and it is the banking elite of the world who benefit the most from the Federal Reserve today.  In the article above when we described the Federal Reserve as “a private bank owned and operated for profit by a very powerful group of elite international bankers” we may have been oversimplifying things a bit, but it is the essence of what is going on.

In an excellent article that she did on the Federal Reserve, Ellen Brown described a number of the ways that the Federal Reserve makes money for those who own it….

The interest on bonds acquired with its newly-issued Federal Reserve Notes pays the Fed’s operating expenses plus a guaranteed 6% return to its banker shareholders. A mere 6% a year may not be considered a profit in the world of Wall Street high finance, but most businesses that manage to cover all their expenses and give their shareholders a guaranteed 6% return are considered “for profit” corporations.

In addition to this guaranteed 6%, the banks will now be getting interest from the taxpayers on their “reserves.” The basic reserve requirement set by the Federal Reserve is 10%. The website of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York explains that as money is redeposited and relent throughout the banking system, this 10% held in “reserve” can be fanned into ten times that sum in loans; that is, $10,000 in reserves becomes $100,000 in loans. Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.8 puts the total “loans and leases in bank credit” as of September 24, 2008 at $7,049 billion. Ten percent of that is $700 billion. That means we the taxpayers will be paying interest to the banks on at least $700 billion annually – this so that the banks can retain the reserves to accumulate interest on ten times that sum in loans.

The banks earn these returns from the taxpayers for the privilege of having the banks’ interests protected by an all-powerful independent private central bank, even when those interests may be opposed to the taxpayers’ — for example, when the banks use their special status as private money creators to fund speculative derivative schemes that threaten to collapse the U.S. economy. Among other special benefits, banks and other financial institutions (but not other corporations) can borrow at the low Fed funds rate of about 2%. They can then turn around and put this money into 30-year Treasury bonds at 4.5%, earning an immediate 2.5% from the taxpayers, just by virtue of their position as favored banks. A long list of banks (but not other corporations) is also now protected from the short selling that can crash the price of other stocks.

The reality is that there are a lot of ways that the Federal Reserve is a money-making tool.  Yes, they do return “some” of their profits to the U.S. government each year.  But the Federal Reserve is NOT a government agency and it DOES make profits.

So just how much money is made over there?  The truth is that we have to rely on what the Federal Reserve tells us, because they have never been subjected to a comprehensive audit by the U.S. government.

Ever.

Right now there is legislation going through Congress that would change that, and the Federal Reserve is fighting it tooth and nail.  They are warning that such an audit could cause a financial disaster.

What are they so afraid of?

Are they afraid that we might get to peek inside and see what they have been up to all these years?

If you are a history buff, then you probably know that debates about a “central bank” go all the way back to the Founding Fathers.

The European banking elite have always been determined to control our currency, and that is exactly what is happening today.

Ever since the Federal Reserve was created, there have been members of the U.S. Congress that have been trying to warn the American people about the insidious nature of this institution.

Just check out what the Honorable Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee had to say all the way back in the 1930s….

“Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders.”

The Federal Reserve is not the solution and it never has been.

The Federal Reserve is the problem.

Any thoughts?

Be Sociable, Share!
books & tape

The time is near when we will have to take a stand or

forever more live as slaves to financial & political tyranny! 

1001138_149226291938245_108553837_n

CRUMMY LOOK BACK AT WATEREGATE AND EARLIER!

There is a history and time lines in the early posts of this blog which address some of these issues but this piece puts it all together & wraps it up with a dose of reality by comparing it to what is happening currently!

The present administration is the most corrupt administration this country has ever had! Ever! No exceptions or exclusions! They are crime, incorporated and they want to destroy our Constitutional liberties by invalidating our Founding Documents and relegating them to a historical trash heap! They are calling them “out of date and irrelevant”! Congressional officials, among others, are stating that they can pick and choose which ones to uphold and which ones to curtail! 

WE HAVE A PROBLEM – RIGHT HERE IN OUR COUNTRY –

NOT FROM WITHOUT BUT FROM WITHIN!

http://personalliberty.com/2013/05/17/flashback-watergate-nazis-nixon-rockefeller/

Flashback: Watergate, Nazis, Nixon, Rockefeller

May 17, 2013 by Jon Rappoport

25th anniversary of Nixon resignation

President Richard Nixon resigned on Aug. 8, 1974.

Watergate eventually became the story of two young rookie reporters who exposed and took down a President.

Try to think of another major story in your lifetime wherein the reporters themselves took center stage and, in the process, nearly eclipsed their own work.

One of them, Bob Woodward, expanded his fame. The powers that be permitted him to go on and, with extraordinary access, write books criticizing future Presidents. Woodward became the in-house attack dog. Mr. Limited Hangout.

The other reporter, Carl Bernstein, faded into relative obscurity. Well, he began connecting journalists to the CIA. That wasn’t a smart career move. That was, perhaps, a case of biting the hand that had fed him.

To learn why Richard Nixon was really blown out of the White House, you could begin with the infamous Nazi chemical/pharmaceutical cartel IG Farben, the cartel that pushed Adolf Hitler over the top into power in Germany.

One of its lasting legacies is the multinational corporation ballooning out into titanic proportions. Farben didn’t just buy smaller companies; it forged favorable agreements with huge corporations all over the world: Standard Oil (Rockefeller), Rhone-Poulenc, Imperial Chemical Industries, DuPont, Dow.

During World War II, Josiah Du Bois, representing the U.S. Federal government, was sent on a fact-finding mission to Guatemala. His comment: “As far as I can tell, the country is a wholly owned subsidiary of Farben.”

What Farben stood for was an attempt to remake the planet in terms of power.

Farben held important cards. It employed brilliant chemists who, in some ways, were far ahead of its competitors. Farben was all about synthetics: rubber, oil, dyes, pharmaceuticals.

Farben saw itself as a modern version of the old alchemists, transforming one substance into another. It came to believe that, with enough time, it would be able to make anything from anything. It envisioned labs in which basic chemical facts would be changed so that, in practice, elements and compounds would be virtually interchangeable.

This was in line with the Nazi obsession to discover the lost secrets of the mythical Aryan race and then reconstitute it with selective breeding, genetic engineering and, of course, the mass murder of “lesser peoples.”

On one level was the idea of chemical transformations, and on another level was the transformation of the human species.

It was really all one piece. The Nazi ideology was the glue.

It was the picture of scientism, the philosophy that asserts science should absolutely rule all facets of life. Nazi Germany showed the world what that philosophy looks like in practice. Farben had prisoners shipped from Auschwitz to its nearby facility, where horrendous medical/pharmaceutical experiments were carried out on them.

At the end of World War II, the Farben executives were put on trial and, despite the efforts of Telford Taylor, the chief U.S. prosecutor, the sentences handed out were light.

There was a reason for this. A new world was coming into being, and mega-corporations and cartels were at the heart of it. They would be the engines driving the global economy and pillaging the natural resources of the planet. It was colonialism with a different face, the East India Company running on technology and industry and a planetary reach beyond anything ever attempted.

So the Farben moguls, and those like them, were seen by many people as designers of the new “peace.”

Consider the total volume of international trade of goods today: The largest 300 corporations in the world are responsible for an unbelievable percentage of it — as high as 25 percent.

So now you see the reason why these treaties like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR) have been launched. Mega-corporations want to roam free. They want to be able to inject money into any entity in the world and suddenly remove it at will. They certainly want to be able to ship goods from one nation to another without paying tariffs, which otherwise would cost them an extraordinary amount of money. For these corporations, nations don’t really exist anymore; they are convenient fictions. These corporations don’t want any restrictions on their plundering of the Global Village.

Farben envisioned and planned for this kind of licentious freedom. It saw itself as more than a German cartel. It was already international, and it was moving toward domination.

However, more powerful forces would overtake it — and I’m not just talking about American soldiers. In the sphere of international influence, there are the Plan A and Plan B people. The Plan A controllers (think Rockefeller dynasty, among others) opted for a “softer, gentler” approach, a more covert program whereby, over a long period of time, the world population would be brought under a global management system, in which mega-corporations would play the central role. The Plan B people, Nazis and their allied interests, wanted crushing force and violence to achieve a somewhat similar goal in a much shorter period of time — with Germany as the leading prow of the movement.

It is in the arena of pharmaceutical domination that one of Farben’s goals has endured. Two of its original components, Bayer and Hoechst, have survived and prospered. And many other drug companies have copied the basic model.

For a number of years, I’ve researched and published on this subject. Death, maiming, destruction, poisoning: These are correct assessments of the overall effects of drug-based medicine. Judging solely by these effects, one could say that war by other means has continued after 1945. And the fronts of devastation have spread.

On the mega-corporate front, the plan for world control remains the Rockefeller template: “free trade.” This plan was advanced, ceaselessly, for 40 years until, on Jan. 1, 1995, the World Trade Organization was fully formed and took charge of the criminal rules of global commerce: the crowning moment.

However, back in the early 1970s, the whole operation had almost been derailed. One man, a crook, a President, a liar, an insecure parody of a head of state, Richard Nixon, went off script. He really went off script.

In an effort to bolster U.S. companies and protect them from foreign competition inside the United States, Nixon began erecting tariffs on a range of goods imported into the United States.

If this Nixon economic plan spread to other countries, the entire global program to install “free trade” and mega-corporate emperors on their thrones for a thousand years could crash and burn.

Nixon was a Rockefeller man. He was owned by them. He’d been rescued from financial ruin by The Family, and now he was in the White House undermining their greatest dream. You can’t overstate the degree of the betrayal from the Rockefeller point of view. You simply can’t.

Something had to be done. The President had to go. This was the real motivation behind Watergate. This was the real op. Yes, there were sub-motives and smaller contexts, as in any major op, but the prime mover was: Get free trade back on track, and get suitable revenge on the puppet in the White House who went off the script.

Any historian who overlooks this is an outright fool or a deceiver.

Whether the Watergate break-in was planned to serve the higher goal or was pounced upon, after the fact, as the grand opportunity, is beside the point. It was there, and it was used. It became the starting point for the Washington Post, its publisher, veteran editor and two cub reporters to break Nixon into pieces.

And if the Rockefeller people needed an inside man to report on the deteriorating mental state of the President as he heated up in the pressure cooker, they had Henry Kissinger, who was another Rockefeller operative.

The Washington Post was owned by Katharine Graham, who was herself a very close friend of the Rockefeller family. Years later, she would be awarded a medal of honor by the University of Chicago, an institution founded by John D. Rockefeller. On her death, a paid heartfelt obituary was inserted in The New York Times by the trustees, faculty and staff of Rockefeller University, where she had served on the University Council.

And she and Nixon already hated each other by the early 1970s.

The managing editor of The Washington Post, Ben Bradlee, was an old hand at writing promotional material, having worked in Europe crafting releases for a CIA front group. A former naval intelligence man, he liked one of his cub reporters, Woodward, who had also worked for the Navy in intelligence.

When Woodward came to Bradlee with a story about a man in a parking garage who was passing secrets from the White House/FBI about Watergate, we are supposed to believe that Bradlee naturally responded by giving the green light to a major investigation. Woodward and Carl Bernstein, another cub, would undertake it — with nothing more than Bradlee’s reputation and the future survival of The Post and Graham’s empire on the line if the cubs got it wrong.

We are supposed to believe Bradlee gave the green light without knowing who the man in the garage was, without knowing whether Woodward could be trusted, without even getting permission from Graham to move ahead.

Bradlee, a grizzled veteran of Washington, understanding exactly what Washington could do to people who told secrets out of school, just said to Woodward and Bernstein, “You’d better be damned sure you’re right, because otherwise we’re all in trouble.”

Two untested cub reporters set loose in a cage with tigers.

The odds of that happening were nil. Bradlee had to know a great deal from the beginning, and he had to have Graham’s signal to move. The series of breaking stories would be spoon-fed to the unsuspecting young reporters. They would be consumed by their ambition to advance their careers. Bradlee was confident because he had the essentials of the scandal in hand — all the way up to Nixon, the target — well in advance of his two reporters.

To have proceeded otherwise, Bradlee was simply not that kind of fool. Whatever Deep Throat, the man in the garage, was dishing out to Woodward didn’t really matter. Bradlee already had it in his pocket. Deep Throat was merely a contrivance to allow the story to expand and grow by steps, and to permit Woodward and Bernstein to believe they were peeling layers from an onion.

The man behind the curtain was David Rockefeller.

After the whole scandal had been exposed and Nixon had flown away, in disgrace, from the White House for the last time, Rockefeller addressed a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce of the European Community (October 1975). He was there to allay their fears about Nixon’s betrayal of the new economic world order. There was really very little he needed to say. Rockefeller had already created (1973) the free-trade Trilateral Commission. A new puppet, Gerald Ford, was in the White House; and Ford had appointed David’s brother, Nelson Rockefeller, as his Vice President.

David told the European attendees, “Fortunately, there are no signs that these anti-[free] trade measures [of Nixon] are supported by the [Ford] Administration.”

And that was that. The global mega-corporate colossus was back on track.

The temporary rip in the Matrix had been repaired.

On a far lower level of power politics, everyone and his brother was consumed with the contrails of the scandal that had driven away Nixon and his colleagues. People were congratulating each other on the expunging of a corrupt conspiracy from public life.

The real players, of course, were still in place, more powerful than ever. David Rockefeller and his aides were preparing for an even greater coup. They had chosen an obscure man with zero name recognition to be the next President of the United States: Jimmy Carter. Carter would function to forward the goals of the Trilateral Commission in bold view of anyone who knew the score.

And every President since Carter, regardless of party affiliation, has supported and extended those globalist-corporate goals, no questions asked. Barack Obama, who fatuously remarked during his 2008 election campaign that NAFTA “needs to be revisited,” has taken his cues like any other puppet.

When, from this perspective, you examine the global takeover of land and resources by GMO agribusiness, the destruction of small family farms, the plundering of natural resources in the Third World, the use of U.N. “peacekeepers” and “humanitarian groups” and intelligence agencies to create a wedge, for corporations, into these areas, you see the hand of the Rockefeller plan.

When you see the destruction of currencies and the escalation of insupportable debt, the incursion of a bewildering number of U.N.-affiliated groups sinking their teeth into local communities all over the planet to “manage sustainable development,” you see the plan.

On the approaching anniversary of Watergate, you can see that the trashing of Nixon — who, like every President since, was put in place to serve his masters — is an opportunity to notice the Plan Behind the Curtain.

Obama? Merely the latest willing front man. A third-rate hustler.

The innocuous-sounding “free trade” policy is the No. 1 priority of every American President. He must do two things: rarely speak of it and allow it to move forward. That’s all. In return, he gets to act as if he’s the most powerful man in the world.

But if he wobbles and considers taking up a position against free trade (corporate domination of the planet), he can look back and see what happened to Nixon. He can learn from that example.

He can recite the famous words of Zbiggie Brzezinski, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission and David Rockefeller’s intellectual flunkey: ”The nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.”

Like Carter, a future President can espouse the most wide-ranging humanitarian philosophy and ascend to a cloud of beautiful altrusim, admired by all — as long as he sticks to the plan.

If not, two reporters coming out of nowhere, wet behind the ears, eager for advancement, will magically learn of his missteps and demolish him.

–Jon Rappoport

Pasted Graphic jr

Jon Rappoport The author of an explosive collection, “The Matrix Revealed,” Jon Rappoport was a candidate for a U.S. Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern and other newspapers and magazines in the United States and Europe. Rappoport has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic and creative power to audiences around the world. His blog, No More Fake News, can be read here.

Email this author | All posts by Jon Rappoport

Below is a “Letter to the Editor”

that makes some important observations on what we have become!

Untitled attachment 00354

This country is and has been ruled by a shadow government since the beginning!

Below are some examples and explanations!

CLick on each image to enlarge it for reading!

inv gov qs p1sm

inv gov qs p2sm

inv gov qs p3sm

inv gov qs p4sm

inv gov qs p5sm

inv gov qs p6sm

inv gov qs p9sm

Some further insight into

The Council On Foreign Relations and David Rockefeller –

cfr & dr

Information on the Bilderberg Group  is below

from the founder, Prince Bernhard

Bilderberg Group Secrets plus

These are only a few of the front groups for the people who rule, known by various names, such as the elite, the illuminati, the shadow government to name a few and their goal is a new world order . A world with no borders, a much smaller total population, one that is easily controlled and ruled by them!

And some final words from one of the descendants of the 13 bloodlines that rule –

and those are facts not bragging points!

Do your own research!

531766_419656804769471_78215041_n

If we want to survive as a free nation and a free people we have to ditch the Fed, kick the UN out of this country and nullify all the treaties that we have signed AND jail all the international bankers for crimes against this nation and its people, like the Icelanders did! IF we do not accomplish this, then all else will be futile!

CRUMMY BIG GORILLA GROWING BIGGER!

Google-Berg: Global Elite Transforms Itself For Technocratic Revolution

Authoritarian, anti-democratic power networks are being re-branded as trendy, philanthropic-style forums

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
May 13, 2013

Eric Schmidt. Image: Wikimedia Commons

The secretive Bilderberg Group is currently undergoing a major transformation that will see it and other high profile networks merge under the banner of Google as the elite accelerates its plan to consolidate its technocratic agenda.

This past weekend, Infowars reporters Paul Joseph Watson and Jon Scobie visited the luxury Grove Hotel in Watford, UK, site of the 2013 Bilderberg Group conference set to take place June 6-9, a clandestine annual gathering of over 100 of the world’s most influential power brokers in the fields of politics, academia, technology, business and banking.

The investigation was prompted by our sources, who advised us to visit the Grove in advance of Bilderberg 2013. This is part one of what promises to be a developing story as the pieces of the jigsaw fall into place backed up by years of Bilderberg tracking and research.

What we discovered was groundbreaking and represents one of if not the most important development in Bilderberg’s 59 year history.

Put simply, Bilderberg is merging with Google under the stewardship of Google CEO Eric Schmidt, a regular Bilderberg attendee. Google’s annual Zeitgeist conference, which has been based at the Grove since 2007, immediately precedes the Bilderberg Group conference by a matter of days.

Backed up by prior research, we were able to confirm in conversations with hotel managers and others that the Grove is now a central base for Google’s agenda to control the global political and technological landscape.

The talk in the Grove is not of Bilderberg, that is barely a footnote, the real excitement centers around Google Zeitgeist, which was described by the London Independent as, “a cuddlier version of the Bilderberg Group, the supposedly shadowy network of financiers that holds a private annual assembly, recast in the image of our new tech masters.”

Bilderberg is indeed being recast as ‘Google-Berg’ – partly because of efforts on behalf of activists to tear away the veil of Bilderberg’s much cherished secrecy, and partly as a means of re-branding authoritarian, undemocratic secret gatherings of elites as trendy, liberal, feel-good philanthropic-style forums like Google Zeitgeist and TED.

In reality, behind the scenes Google is using such forums as proving grounds on which to form the consensus that shapes the globe. We were told directly that the organizers behind the so-called “Arab Spring,” which began in Tunisia and Egypt, which as we have documented is in fact a series of contrived western-backed color revolutions masquerading as organic uprisings, were recruited by Google and subsequently attended the Zeitgeist conference at the Grove.

It’s also well documented that the man responsible for kick-starting the “revolution” in Egypt, which led to the installation of a Muslim Brotherhood dictatorship which the west can now use as a justification for further intervention, was Google employee Wael Ghonim.

Google’s growing influence within both the British and American governments is also well documented. Eric Schmidt was a campaign advisor and a major donor to Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns. He was also reportedly offered the post of Treasury Secretary within the Obama administration. In Britain, Google representatives have met no less than 23 times with Conservative Party officials since the general election in 2010. David Cameron addressed the inaugural 2006 Zeitgeist conference before going on to become Prime Minister four years later. British Chancellor George Osborne paid a visit to Zeitgeist just weeks before he also attended Bilderberg 2011 in St. Moritz, Switzerland.

The crossover between Zeitgeist and Bilderberg has deepened in recent years, with the London Telegraph comparing the power of the Google confab to the World Economic Forum in Davos, “attracting figures of global significance to talk and to network.”

Former US President Bill Clinton, groomed by the Bilderberg Group, has also given speeches at Zeitgeist, as has fellow Bilderberg attendee Prince Charles. Another Telegraph report described Zeitgeist as, “one of the most high-powered gatherings of business leaders, thinkers and those that are considered to generally shape the global future.”

Google is clearly positioning itself to become a force more powerful than governments in controlling and monitoring people’s behavior across the globe through all manner of different means, from cars that drive themselves (and are constantly tracked by a centralized Google database), to Google Glass which is akin to having a Google microchip in your forehead, to Google’s deep involvement in manipulating mass movements through social media as they did in Egypt and Tunisia.

The Grove Hotel is a perfect staging ground for such machinations given its role in World War 2 as a “secret wartime HQ for the London, Midland & Scottish Railway” named “Project X”.

The direction in which this is all heading can clearly be surmised from remarks made by Eric Schmidt himself, who has repeatedly made it clear that he thinks privacy is a relic of the past and plans to turn Google into the ultimate Big Brother that makes George Orwell’s 1984 look like a children’s fairy tale.

“We don’t need you to type at all. We know where you are. We know where you’ve been. We can more or less know what you’re thinking about.”

“I actually think most people don’t want Google to answer their questions […] They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next.”

“If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.”

“We need a [verified] name service for people,” he said. “Governments will demand it.” (Chinese-style Internet control).

“We know everything you’re doing and the government can track you.”

“We will know your position down to the foot and down to the inch over time…Your car will drive itself, it’s a bug that cars were invented before computers…you’re never lonely…you’re never bored…you’re never out of ideas.”

In numerous speeches, including those made at Google Zeitgeist, Schmidt has outlined his vision for a collectivist, permanently networked world in which individuality and privacy are ostracized and those who refuse to sign up to the new religion of transhumanism are shunned as sub-human savages.

That is the primary agenda now being formulated by Google Zeitgeist luminaries in concert with the Bilderberg Group, which shares many of the same members.

A Busy Time at the Grove

Our source told us that there were “four or five big conferences” coming up at the Grove in May, June and July, but intimated that Google Zeitgeist was clearly considered the biggest, with the 227 room hotel not even large enough to accommodate all the guests and administrative staff required to be in attendance, adding that they had to be put up in London hotels.

Huge temporary structures, watched by security guards, were also being constructed on grounds near to the hotel when we visited. These are set to be used for Google’s ‘Big Tent’ event, which is a more public showcase than their private ‘Zeitgeist’ confab. Whether the facilities will also be used by the Bilderberg Group remains to be seen.

The source emphasized that Grove staff had been told not to disclose any information about the Zeitgeist conference and that Google only released information they wanted the public to know. However, the upcoming confab was the talk of the bar and both employees and guests were clearly excited about it.

The source said that security for the event was the same as when heads of state would visit and that the hotel was coordinating with “state security” to run the conference, which inevitably means that taxpayer money will be used to fund the operation, as it is admittedly being used to provide security for Bilderberg. He added that the likes of Google and Bilderberg chose the Grove as a venue because security was far easier to provide compared to hotels in London which are surrounded by high-traffic streets.

Bilderberg’s 2013 Agenda

In terms of Bilderberg’s agenda for the 2013 confab, early indications from our inside source have thrown up a number of different issues that will be up for discussion before Bilderberg instructs its members to implement the agreed upon consensus in each of their fields of influence.

Bear in mind that the motivation behind Bilderberg’s scheming can probably best be encapsulated by remarks made by Bilderberg luminary Henry Kissinger which recently came to light thanks to Wikileaks.

“Before the Freedom of Information Act, I used to say at meetings, ‘The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.’ [laughter] But since the Freedom of Information Act, I’m afraid to say things like that,” said Kissinger.

At least some if not all of the following issues will be discussed and agreed upon at Bilderberg 2013.

– Targeting Iran’s nuclear processing facilities for destruction via air strikes within the next 3 years if Tehran refuses to give up its nuclear program.
– Prolonging the war in Syria by arming the rebels and overturning recent military victories by Assad’s forces.
– The threat of a global pandemic, caused in part by rising resistance to antibiotics, which given the role of some of the pharmaceutical companies represented at Bilderberg in “accidentally” releasing viruses is somewhat rich.
– The manufacturing revolution of 3D printing and ways to control it and prevent the democratization of production.
– So-called “cyber resilience,” which means more state control over the Internet. There is much talk of “Digital Wildfires” – they are scared stiff about losing control over information dissemination.
– Setting up a Ministry of Truth for the Internet similar to that advocated by Bill Clinton. Controlling what can be published on the Internet.
– Advancing so-called “smart cities” that spy on every aspect of public behavior. Installing systems like Intellistreets that record street conversations. Rolling out the landscape of the technocracy.
– The threat caused to social stability by declining living standards and wealth.
– A desperate last gasp move to prevent Britain from leaving the EU and crushing the dream of a centralized European federation.
– More bailouts to prop up the euro.
– Minimal economic growth in 2013.
– Increasing the amount of power obtained by central banks under the guise of “bank reform”.
– Organizing more aggressive powers of tax collection
– Managing a growing credit bubble that threatens runaway inflation in Europe.

We will expand more on Bilderberg’s 2013 agenda as and when more information is obtained from our sources.

View a selection of photos from The Grove, site of Bilderberg 2013 and Google Zeitgeist below.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

This article was posted: Monday, May 13, 2013 at 10:07 am

ACTION IS NEEDED FOR SELF PRESERVATION!

globalits & new economic world forum 2012sm

globalist report elite nwo p1sm

globalist report elite nwo p2sm

I will keep the information updated whenever “Infowars” posts it! This is worrisome and today I deleted thousands of my emails and closed all of my g mail accounts! Between their allowing, without warrants, any branch of the federal gov to monitor all the emails and making it almost impossible to remove yourself from some of their services, even when you did not ask to join them and now this – merging with a group whose purpose for the past 59 years has been world domination (read new world order) and expressly working on ways to bring the world’s total population down to 500,000 – it became just too much for me! I understand how that newsman felt, in the movie, when he roared “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!”

531766_419656804769471_78215041_n

CRUMMY GOV IS MONITORING ALL COMMUNICATIONS!

944216_10151698766362577_1755407612_n

HOW DID WE THE PEOPLE ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN???

http://www.infowars.com/the-u-s-government-is-monitoring-all-phone-calls-all-emails-and-all-internet-activity/

The U.S. Government Is Monitoring All Phone Calls, All Emails And All Internet Activity

Michael Snyder
American Dream
May 7, 2013

Big Brother is watching everything that you do on the Internet and listening to everything that you say on your phone. Every single day in America, the U.S. government intercepts and stores nearly 2 billion emails, phone calls and other forms of electronic communication. Former NSA employees have come forward and have described exactly what is taking place, and this surveillance activity has been reported on by prominent news organizations such as the Washington Post, Fox News and CNN, but nobody really seems to get too upset about it.

Either most Americans are not aware of what is really going on or they have just accepted it as part of modern life. But where will this end? Do we really want to live in a dystopian “Big Brother society” where the government literally reads every single thing that we write and listens to every single thing that we say? Is that what the future of America is going to look like? If so, what do you think our founding fathers would have said about that?

Many Americans may not realize this, but nothing that you do on your cell phone or on the Internet will ever be private again. According to the Washington Post, the NSA intercepts and stores an astounding amount of information every single day…

Every day, collection systems at the National Security Agency intercept and store 1.7 billion e-mails, phone calls and other types of communications. The NSA sorts a fraction of those into 70 separate databases.

But even the Washington Post may not have been aware of the full scope of the surveillance. In fact, National Security Agency whistleblower William Binney claims that the NSA has collected “20 trillion transactions” involving U.S. citizens…

In fact, I would suggest that they’ve assembled on the order of 20 trillion transactions about U.S. citizens with other U.S. citizens.

And NSA whistleblowers have also told us that the agency “has the capability to do individualized searches, similar to Google, for particular electronic communications in real time through such criteria as target addresses, locations, countries and phone numbers, as well as watch-listed names, keywords, and phrases in email.”

So the NSA must have tremendous data storage needs. That must be why they are building such a mammoth data storage center out in Utah. According to Fox News, it will have the capability of storing 5 zettabytes of data…

The NSA says the Utah Data Center is a facility for the intelligence community that will have a major focus on cyber security. The agency will neither confirm nor deny specifics. Some published reports suggest it could hold 5 zettabytes of data. (Just one zettabyte is the equivalent of about 62 billion stacked iPhones 5′s– that stretches past the moon.

Are you outraged by all of this?

You should be.

The U.S. government is spying on the American people and yet they continue to publicly deny that they are actually doing it.

Last week, this government spying program was once again confirmed by another insider. What former FBI counterterrorism agent Tim Clemente told Erin Burnett of CNN is absolutely astounding

BURNETT: Tim, is there any way, obviously, there is a voice mail they can try to get the phone companies to give that up at this point. It’s not a voice mail. It’s just a conversation. There’s no way they actually can find out what happened, right, unless she tells them?

CLEMENTE: “No, there is a way. We certainly have ways in national security investigations to find out exactly what was said in that conversation. It’s not necessarily something that the FBI is going to want to present in court, but it may help lead the investigation and/or lead to questioning of her. We certainly can find that out.

BURNETT: “So they can actually get that? People are saying, look, that is incredible.

CLEMENTE: “No, welcome to America. All of that stuff is being captured as we speak whether we know it or like it or not.”

Yes, “all of that stuff” is most definitely being “captured” and it is time for the Obama administration to be honest with the American people about what is actually going on.

Meanwhile, the recent bombing in Boston has many of our politicians calling for even tighter surveillance.

For example, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently said that our interpretation of the U.S. Constitution will “have to change” to deal with the new threats that we are facing. More “smart cameras” are going up in New York, and Bloomberg says that we are “never going to know where all of our cameras are”. The following is from a recent RT article

New York City police officials intend to expand the already extensive use of surveillance cameras throughout town. The plan, unveiled Thursday, comes as part of a drive for increased security around the US following the Boston Marathon attack.

New York City Police Department Commissioner Ray Kelly announced the plan during a press conference with Mayor Michael Bloomberg, in which the two announced that the suspected Boston Marathon bombers were planning to attack New York next. The pair said they hope to discourage criminals by using so-called “smart cameras” that will aggregate data from 911 alerts, arrest records, mapped crime patterns, surveillance cameras and radiation detectors, among other tools, according to The Verge.

You’re never going to know where all of our cameras are,” Bloomberg told reporters gathered outside City Hall. “And that’s one of the ways you deter people; they just don’t know whether the person sitting next to you is somebody sitting there or a detective watching.”

Will you feel safer if the government is watching you 100% of the time?

Do you want them to see what you are doing 100% of the time?

You might want to think about that, because that is where all of this is headed.

In fact, the truth is that spy cameras are not just going up all over New York City. Most Americans may not realize this, but a network of spy cameras is now going up all over the nation. The following is an excerpt from one of my previous articles

“You are being watched. The government has a secret system – a machine – that spies on you every hour of every day.” That is how each episode of “Person of Interest” on CBS begins. Most Americans that have watched the show just assume that such a surveillance network is completely fictional and that the government would never watch us like that. Sadly, most Americans are wrong. Shocking new details have emerged this week which prove that a creepy nationwide network of spy cameras is being rolled out across the United States. Reportedly, these new spy cameras are “more accurate than modern facial recognition technology”, and every few seconds they send back data from cities and major landmarks all over the United States to a centralized processing center where it is analyzed. The authorities believe that the world has become such a dangerous place that the only way to keep us all safe is to watch what everyone does all the time. But the truth is that instead of “saving America”, all of these repressive surveillance technologies are slowly killing our liberties and our freedoms. America is being transformed into an Orwellian prison camp right in front of our eyes, and very few people are even objecting to it.

For many more examples of how the emerging Big Brother surveillance grid is tightening all around us, please see my previous article entitled “19 Signs That America Is Being Systematically Transformed Into A Giant Surveillance Grid“.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama is telling us to reject those that are warning us about government tyranny. The following is what he told the graduating class of The Ohio State University on May 5th, 2013

“Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems. Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.”

So what do you think?

Should we just ignore all of the violations of our privacy that are happening?

Should we just ignore what the U.S. Constitution says about privacy and let the government monitor us however it wants to?

We ignore what this administration is doing at our peril!

We have lost a lot of our freedoms already and they will not be given back!

If we loose any more we will become the land of the government slaves!

 

gor 1984 quote

Below is a copy of our Constitution and the Amendments, with a link to the US Senate website, where these documents are digitally kept.

It is time for all of us to read them and learn them. They were written for our protection and to limit the government – not the other way around!

constitution_1_of_4_630

http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm

 

Constitution of the United States

Preamble   Article I   Article II   Article III   Article IV   Article V   Article VI

Article VII      AMENDMENTS

 

Introduction

 

Written in 1787, ratified in 1788, and in operation since 1789, the United States Constitution is the world’s longest surviving written charter of government.  Its first three words – “We The People” – affirm that the government of the United States exists to serve its citizens.  The supremacy of the people through their elected representatives is recognized in Article I, which creates a Congress consisting of a Senate and a House of Representatives. The positioning of Congress at the beginning of the Constitution reaffirms its status as the “First Branch” of the federal government.

The Constitution assigned to Congress responsibility for organizing the executive and judicial branches, raising revenue, declaring war, and making all laws necessary for executing these powers.  The president is permitted to veto specific legislative acts, but Congress has the authority to override presidential vetoes by two-thirds majorities of both houses.  The Constitution also provides that the Senate advise and consent on key executive and judicial appointments and on the ratification of treaties.

For over two centuries the Constitution has remained in force because its framers successfully separated and balanced governmental powers to safeguard the interests of majority rule and minority rights, of liberty and equality, and of the central and state governments.  More a concise statement of national principles than a detailed plan of governmental operation, the Constitution has evolved to meet the changing needs of a modern society profoundly different from the eighteenth-century world in which its creators lived.

This annotated version of the Constitution provides the original text (left-hand column) with commentary about the meaning of the original text and how it has changed since 1789 (right-hand column).

 
 

 

Original Text   Explanation
 
Preamble
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.   The Preamble explains the purposes of the Constitution, and defines the powers of the new government as originating from the people of the United States.
 
 
 

 

Article I

Section 1   Section 2   Section 3   Section 4   Section 5   Section 6   Section 7

Section 8   Section 9   Section 10

     
 
 

 

Section 1

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.   The Constitution divides the federal government into three branches, giving legislative powers to a bicameral (two chamber) Congress.
 
 
 

 

Section 2

     
 
 

 

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.   The House of Representatives was intended to be “the people’s house.”  Its members were elected directly by the voters in the states, and the entire House would have to stand for election every two years.
 
 
 

 

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

 

  Representatives need to be 25 years old (compared to 30 for senators), and 7 years a citizen (compared to 9 years for senators).  They must be residents within their states at the time of their election, but do not necessarily have to live within their districts.
 
 
 

 

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.   Membership in the House is apportioned according to the population of the states.  Every state must have at least one House seat.  Larger states will have many more representatives.  Every ten years, after the census has been taken, House districts are reapportioned to reflect their changing population.  For many years the House increased its size as the nation’s population grew, but in 1911 the number of representatives was fixed at 435 (together with non-voting delegates representing several territories and the District of Columbia).  Words in italics indicate provisions that were later dropped from the Constitution.  The 13th amendment abolished slavery and the 14th amendment provided that representation would be determined according to the whole number of persons in each state, not by the “three-fifths” of the slaves.  Since American Indians are now taxed, they are counted for purposes of apportionment.
 
 
 

 

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

 

  Vacant House seats must be filled by election.  For the Senate, state governors may fill vacancies.
 
 
 

 

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

 

  Representatives choose their presiding officer, the Speaker, from among the membership of the majority party.  Other elected officers, such as the chaplain, clerk of the House, sergeant at arms, and doorkeeper, are not members of the House.  Impeachment is the power to remove federal officers.  The House initiates the process by voting to impeach, which then refers the matter to the Senate for a trial.
 
 
 

 

Section 3

     
 
 

 

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

 

  Each state has two senators, regardless of the size of its population.  Originally, senators were chosen by state legislatures.  In 1913 the 17th amendment provided that senators would be directly elected by the people.
Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.

 

  From the beginning, senators were divided into three groups for staggered elections, so that one-third of the seats are filled every two years.  The italicized parts, regarding the filling of vacancies, were altered by the 17th amendment.
 
 
 

 

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.   As with representatives, the Constitution fixes the qualifications a person must meet to be eligible to be a senator.
 
 
 

 

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

 

  As the presiding officer of the Senate, the vice president may vote only to break a tie.
 
 
 

 

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

 

  Except for the Vice President, the Senate elects its own officers.  The President pro tempore is usually the longest-serving member of the majority party.  Other elected officers include a chaplain, secretary of the Senate, and sergeant at arms, who are not senators.
 
 
 

 

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.   Once the House votes to impeach, the Senate conducts a trial to determine whether to convict or acquit.  A two-thirds vote is necessary to remove the individual from office.  The chief justice of the United States presides over the impeachment trial of a president.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.   Convicted persons can be barred from holding future office, and may be subject to criminal trial in the courts.
 
 
 

 

Section 4

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

 

  Federal elections are conducted by the individual states, although Congress has gradually enacted laws that regulate those elections.  The 17th amendment made the treatment of the election of senators and representatives the same.
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

 

  The 20th amendment changed this provision for the convening of Congress from the first Monday in December to the 3rd of January.
 
 
 

 

Section 5

     
 
 

 

Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

 

  The House and Senate decide whether their members are qualified to serve and have been properly elected, and determine any disputed elections.  One-half plus one of each house is necessary to make a quorum to conduct business.
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

 

  The Senate and House each sets its own rules, disciplines its own members, and by a two-thirds vote can expel a member.  Censure and lesser punishments require only a majority vote.
 
 
 

 

Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

 

  The Senate and House each publish journals listing bills passed, amendments offered, motions made, and votes taken.  In addition to these journals, Congress publishes an essentially verbatim account of its debates, called the Congressional Record.  Videotapes of floor proceedings are deposited at the National Archives.
 
 
 

 

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

 

  This section was included to prevent either chamber from blocking legislation through its refusal to meet.  Each chamber takes very seriously its independence of the other body.  To avoid having to ask the other chamber for permission to adjourn, the Senate and House simply conduct pro forma (as a matter of form) sessions to meet the three-day constitutional requirement.  No business is conducted at these sessions, which generally last for less than one minute.
 
 
 

 

Section 6

     
 
 

 

The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

 

  The “speech or debate” clause is a basic protection of members of Congress in a government of separated powers.  Inherited from the British parliament, the right prevents executive oppression of the legislature, and here protects members from criminal or civil liability in the performance of their legislative responsibilities.
 
 
 

 

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

 

  To preserve the separation of powers, no member may be appointed to an executive or judicial office that was created or accept a salary that was increased during the term to which that senator or representative was elected, nor may anyone serving in Congress simultaneously hold office in any other branch of government.
 
 
 

 

Section 7

     
 
 

 

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

 

  The House, directly elected by the people, received authority to originate all tax bills.  The Senate, however, can amend a tax bill, and the support of both houses is necessary for the bill to become law.
 
 
 

 

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it.  If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.   The “presentment clause” describes the only way that a bill can become law: it must be passed in identical form by both Houses and it must be signed by the president or passed by a two-thirds vote of Congress over the president’s veto.  If, while Congress is in session, the president does not sign a bill, it automatically becomes law.  If Congress has adjourned or is in recess, the president can “pocket veto” the bill – in a sense, simply putting it in his pocket, unsigned.  Congress cannot override bills that have been pocket vetoed.
Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.   This clause prevents Congress from circumventing the previous clause by calling a bill something else.  All it means is that any “order, resolution, or vote” that has the force of law must be passed in the manner of a bill.
 
 
 

 

Section 8

     
 
 

 

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;   Section 8 begins the enumerated powers of the federal government delegated to Congress.  The first is the power to tax and to spend the money raised by taxes, to provide for the nation’s defense and general welfare.  This section was supplemented by the 16th amendment, which permitted Congress to levy an income tax.
 
 
 

 

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

 

  Congress can borrow money through the issuance of bonds and other means.  When it borrows money, the United States creates a binding obligation to repay the debt and cannot repudiate it.
 
 
 

 

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

 

  The “commerce clause” is one of the most far-reaching grants of power to Congress.  Interstate commerce covers all movement of people and things across state lines, and every form of communication and transportation.  The commerce clause has permitted a wide variety of federal laws, from the regulation of business to outlawing of racial segregation.  The “Indian commerce clause” has become the main source of power for congressional legislation dealing with Native Americans.
 
 
 

 

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

 

  Acts of Congress define the requirements by which immigrants can become citizens.  Only the federal government, not the states, can determine who becomes a citizen.  Bankruptcy laws make provisions for individuals or corporations that fail to pay their debts.
 
 
 

 

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

 

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

 

  These clauses permit Congress to coin money and to issue paper currency.  By extension, under its ability to enact laws “necessary and proper” to carry out these powers (as stated at the end of Article 1, Section 8), Congress created the Federal Reserve System to regulate the nation’s monetary supply.
 
 
 

 

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

 

  The postal powers embrace all measures necessary to establish the system and to insure the safe and speedy transit and prompt delivery of the mails.  Congress may also punish those who use the mails for unlawful purposes.
 
 
 

 

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

 

  Copyright and patent protection of authors and inventors are authorized by this clause, although it uses neither word.
 
 
 

 

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

 

  The Constitution provides only for a Supreme Court, and left it to Congress to create lower (“inferior”) courts, and to set their jurisdictions and duties.
 
 
 

 

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

 

  Every sovereign nation possesses these powers, and Congress has acted under this authority from the beginning.
 
 
 

 

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

  The “war powers” are defined here and in Article 2, Section 2.  Congress declares war, while the president wages war.  However, presidents have committed U.S. forces leading to conflict without congressional declaration of war in Korea, Vietnam, and other places, provoking national argument over the meaning of these powers.  Congress’ control of funding the military provides another check on the executive branch.
 
 
 

 

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

  Under these provisions, the right of the states to maintain a militia, including what is now the National Guard, is always subordinate to the power of Congress.  In 1795 Congress first gave the president authority to call out the militia to suppress insurrections.  Presidents employed this power to enforce federal law during desegregation disputes during the 1950s, and later during the civil disturbances in various cities during the 1960s
 
 
 

 

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And   This clause enables Congress to govern the District of Columbia.  Congress has now delegated that power to a locally elected government, subject to federal oversight.  Congress also governs forts, arsenals, and other places obtained from the states for the federal government’s purposes.
 
 
 

 

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

 

  The “elastic clause” enlarges legislative power by enabling Congress to use any means it thinks reasonable to put these powers into action.  This clause also authorizes Congress to enact legislation necessary to carry out the powers of the other branches, for example to organize and reorganize the executive branch.
 
 
 

 

Section 9

     
 
 

 

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

 

  This obsolete provision was designed to protect the slave trade from congressional restriction for a period of time.
 
 
 

 

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

 

  Habeas corpus is a judicial device by which jailed people may require their jailer to justify their imprisonment to a court.  It is a fundamental safeguard of individual liberty, and the Supreme Court has interpreted it to give federal courts review over state court convictions and to enforce federal constitutional guarantees.  It is generally accepted that only Congress has the power to suspend habeas corpus.  President Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of the right during the Civil War met with strong opposition.
 
 
 

 

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.   A bill of attainder is a legislative act declaring the guilt of an individual or a group of persons and punishing them.  Only the courts may determine whether one has violated a criminal statute.  An ex post facto law declares an act illegal after it has been committed, or increases the punishment for an offense already committed.
 
 
 

 

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

 

  Direct taxes are poll or “head” taxes and taxes on land.  The Supreme Court once held that income taxes were unconstitutional direct taxes, a result overturned by the 16th amendment.
No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

 

  To prohibit discrimination against any states or regions, Congress cannot tax goods exported from a state to foreign countries or those that move between states.
No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another; nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

 

  Congress cannot favor one state against another while regulating trade.
 
 
 

 

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

 

  The departments and agencies of the executive branch may not spend any money that Congress has not appropriated, or use federal money for any purpose that Congress has not specified.
 
 
 

 

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.   This clause was designed to end the aristocratic tendencies that the American Revolution had been fought against.  Federal officials must turn over to the government all but minimal gifts from foreign nations.
 
 
 

 

Section 10

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.   These provisions protect national powers from state incursions.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress.   States may not interfere with the international trade of the United States.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.   States cannot levy tonnage duties, which are taxes charged for the privilege of entering, trading in, or remaining in a port.  States may come together to work on common problems, such as pollution of a river passing through several states, but the agreements or compacts they reach are subject to congressional consent.
 
 
 

 

Article II

Section 1   Section 2   Section 3   Section 4

     
 
 

 

Section 1

     
 
 

 

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:   This clause provided the title of the chief executive and defined the term of office.  It says nothing about reelection. George Washington established a two-term tradition, which was not broken until Franklin D. Roosevelt won a third and fourth term. The 22nd amendment now limits presidents to two terms.
 
 
 

 

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.   The Constitution established an electoral college as a compromise between direct popular election of the president and election by Congress. The method of selecting electors was left to the states.  Electors are now chosen by popular vote.
 
 
 

 

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representatives from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice-President.   This clause was superseded by the 12th amendment, after the election of 1800 in which Thomas Jefferson and his running mate, Aaron Burr, received identical votes and both claimed the office. After many votes, the House of Representatives chose Jefferson, and soon thereafter the amendment was speedily approved.
 
 
 

 

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.   Congress has enacted legislation requiring that presidential elections (the selection of electors) occur on the Tuesday following the first Monday in November every four years. Electors gather to vote on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December. The two houses of Congress convene to count the electoral ballots on the following January 6.
 
 
 

 

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.   This clause requires that in order to take the oath of office a president must be 35, a resident within the United States for 14 years, and a natural-born citizen. This last requirement raises the question of whether someone born to American parents outside of the United States would be eligible to hold the office.
 
 
 

 

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.   The 25th amendment superseded this clause regarding presidential disability, vacancy of the office, and methods of succession.
 
 
 

 

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.   To preserve the president’s independence, Congress can neither raise nor lower the president’s salary during his term.  Nor can a president accept any other pay.
 
 
 

 

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”   The Constitution prescribes the oath that presidents must take. By contrast, Congress by statute created the oath taken by other federal officials, including the vice president.
 
 
 

 

Section 2

     
 
 

 

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.   As Commander in Chief, the president controls the military forces. Presidents have also cited this power as extending to their control of national and foreign policy in war and peacetime. Congress may not restrain the president’s power to pardon, except in impeachment cases.
 
 
 

 

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.   The Constitution gives the Senate a share in foreign policy by requiring Senate consent, by a two-thirds vote, to any treaty before it may go into effect. The president may enter into “executive agreements” with other nations without the Senate’s consent, but if these involve more than minor matters they may prove controversial.

The president must also submit judicial and major executive branch nominations to the Senate for its advice and consent. The Constitution makes no provision for the removal of executive officers, which has remained largely at the discretion of the president.

 
 
 

 

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.   When the Senate is not in session, and therefore unable to receive nominations, the president may make recess appointments. The Senate will then consider the nomination when it returns to session.
 
 
 

 

Section 3

     
 
 

 

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information on the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.   The duty to deliver to Congress an annual address, known as the State of the Union message, is the basis of the president’s legislative leadership. Presidents have frequently summoned Congress into “extra” or “special” sessions, but they have never exercised the power to adjourn Congress. The law enforcement function has been a source of the president’s control over the executive branch, however the laws that the president is to execute are the laws that Congress passes, and those laws constrain as well as empower the chief executive.
 
 
 

 

Section 4

     
 
 

 

The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.   Impeachment is the ultimate power of Congress to deter and to punish abuse of power by officers of the executive and judicial branches. Federal judges constitute the greater number of impeached and convicted officers. President Andrew Johnson won acquittal by a single vote, and President Richard Nixon resigned before he could be impeached.  President Bill Clinton was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate.
 
 
 

 

Article III

Section 1   Section 2   Section 3

     
 
 

 

Section 1

     
 
 

 

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.   This clause identifies the third branch of our separated government, empowering the courts to decide cases and limiting them to the exercise of a certain kind of authority. The Constitution makes no mention of judicial review, the right of the Supreme Court to declare federal and state laws unconstitutional. The Court asserted this right in the case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803 and on more than 120 occasions since then. For the sake of independence, justices and judges are given life tenures, subject only to removal by impeachment, and a guarantee that their salaries cannot be reduced.
 
 
 

 

Section 2

     
 
 

 

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.   The use of  “cases” and “controversies” emphasizes the nature of the judicial power. These words encompass the concepts of adversity between parties, and require that litigants must have suffered injury sufficient to invoke the power of a federal court.
 
 
 

 

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.   Certain cases may be brought directly to the Supreme Court without having been heard by another court. Under statute, the Supreme Court also exercises appellate review, that is the right to review the decisions of a lower federal or state court.
 
 
 

 

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.   Anyone accused of a crime has a right to a trial by jury, except in the case of impeachments. This right was further defined and strengthened by the 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th amendments.
 
 
 

 

Section 3

     
 
 

 

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

  This clause limits Congress’ ability to define treason or to set its punishment, as a means of preventing political “offenders” from being charged as traitors. At least two witnesses must testify in court that the defendant committed a treasonable act.
 
 
 

 

Article IV

Section 1   Section 2   Section 3   Section 4

     
 
 

 

Section 1

     
 
 

 

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.   Each state is required to recognize the laws and records (such as licenses) of other states and to enforce rights in its own courts that would be enforced in other state courts.
 
 
 

 

Section 2

     
 
 

 

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.   States must treat the citizens of other states equally, without discrimination.
 
 
 

 

A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.   The governor of a state in which a fugitive is found must return the fugitive to the state demanding custody.
 
 
 

 

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.   This clause, applicable to fleeing slaves, is now obsolete.
 
 
 

 

Section 3

     
 
 

 

 New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.   By acts of Congress, newly settled or newly acquired areas will be admitted as states on an equal status with those states already in the Union.
 
 
 

 

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.   Congress has charge of the public lands within the states, which in the West constitutes an enormous amount of land. Congress also governs acquired territories, which today include Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
 
 
 
 
 

 

Section 4

     
 
 

 

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.   Under this provision, Congress has authorized presidents to send federal troops into a state to guarantee law and order.
 
 
 

 

Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.   The Constitution may be amended in two ways. The standard device, used for all amendments so far, is for both houses of Congress to pass by two-thirds vote a proposal, which they send to the states for ratification, either by state legislatures or by conventions within the states. An amendment is ratified when three-fourths of the states approve. The Constitution also authorizes a national convention, when two-thirds of the states petition Congress for such a convention, to propose amendments, which would also have to be ratified by three-quarters of the states.
 
 
 

 

Article VI

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

  The new federal government assumed the financial obligations of the old government under the Articles of Confederation.

The “supremacy clause” is the most important guarantor of national union.  It assures that the Constitution and federal laws and treaties take precedence over state law and binds all judges to adhere to that principle in their courts.

State and federal officials, whether legislative, executive, or judicial, must take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.  No religious test, either an avowal or a repudiation of any religious belief, shall ever be required of any public officeholder in the United States.

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Article VII

The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.   The Constitutional Convention met under the Government of the Articles of Confederation, which required unanimous assent of all 13 states to change any provisions of the Articles. Nevertheless, the Constitution mandated that the new government would go into effect when nine of the 13 states acted affirmatively.
 
 
 

 

 
 

 

AMENDMENTS

Amendment I (1791)   Amendment II (1791)

Amendment III (1791)   Amendment IV (1791)

Amendment V (1791)   Amendment VI (1791)

Amendment VII (1791)   Amendment VIII (1791)

Amendment IX (1791)   Amendment X (1791)

Amendment XI (1798)   Amendment XII (1804)

Amendment XIII (1865)   Amendment XIV (1868)

Amendment XV (1870)   Amendment XVI (1913)

Amendment XVII (1913)   Amendment XVIII (1919)

Amendment XIX (1920)   Amendment XX (1933)

Amendment XXI (1933)   Amendment XXII (1951)

Amendment XXIII (1961)   Amendment XXIV (1964)

Amendment XXV (1967)   Amendment XXVI (1971)

Amendment XXVII (1992)

     
 
 

 

Amendment I (1791)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.   The first ten amendments comprise the Bill of Rights. The first amendment protects religious freedom by prohibiting the establishment of an official or exclusive church or sect. Free speech and free press are protected, although they can be limited for reasons of defamation, obscenity, and certain forms of state censorship, especially during wartime. The freedom of assembly and petition also covers marching, picketing and pamphleteering.
 
 
 

 

Amendment II (1791)

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.   Whether this provision protects the individual’s right to own firearms or whether it deals only with the collective right of the people to arm and maintain a militia has long been debated.
 
 
 

 

Amendment III (1791)

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.   This virtually obsolete provision was in response to anger over the British military practice of quartering soldiers in colonists’ homes.
 
 
 

 

Amendment IV (1791)

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.   Applying to arrests and to searches of persons, homes, and other private places, this amendment requires a warrant, thereby placing a neutral magistrate between the police and the citizen.
 
 
 

 

Amendment V (1791)

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.   Indictment by a grand jury requires the decision of ordinary citizens to place one in danger of conviction. Double jeopardy means that when one has been convicted or acquitted, the government cannot place that person on trial again. The self-incrimination clause means that the prosecution must establish guilt by independent evidence and not by extorting a confession from the suspect, although voluntary confessions are not precluded.  Due process of the law requires the government to observe proper and traditional methods in depriving one of an important right. Finally, when the government seizes property to use in the public interest, it must pay the owner fair value.
 
 
 

 

Amendment VI (1791)

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.   Defendants in criminal cases are entitled to public trials that follow relatively soon after initiation of the charges. Witnesses must be brought to the trial to testify before the defendant, judge, and jury. Defendants are also entitled to compel witnesses on their behalf to appear and testify.
 
 
 

 

Amendment VII (1791)

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.   Mistrustful of judges, the people insisted on the right to jury trial in civil cases. The minimum level, $20, is so low today that it would burden the federal judiciary, so various devices have been developed to permit alternative resolution of disputes.
 
 
 

 

Amendment VIII (1791)

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.   Neither bail nor punishment for a crime are to be unreasonably severe. The “cruel and unusual punishments” clause has been the basis for challenges to the death penalty.
 
 
 

 

Amendment IX (1791)

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.   Failure of the Constitution to mention a specific right does not mean that the government can abridge that right, but its protection has to be found elsewhere.
 
 
 

 

Amendment X (1791)

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.   The federal government is the recipient of constitutionally delegated powers.  What is not delegated remains in the states or in the people.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XI (1798)

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.   When the Supreme Court held in the 1793 case Chisholm v. Georgia that a state could be sued in federal court under Article III of the Constitution, this amendment was rapidly adopted.  It provided that states could only be sued in state courts.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XII (1804)

The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;—The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;—The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President—The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.   After the disputed election of 1800, this amendment required separate designation of presidential and vice presidential candidates, each of whom must meet the same qualifications for eligibility as the president.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XIII (1865)

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

  President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation did not apply to slavery in the states that had not seceded. To abolish slavery entirely, Congress proposed this amendment, which also gave Congress specific authority to enforce the amendment by legislation. Under these provisions, Congress has legislated against slavery-like conditions, such as peonage.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XIV (1868)

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

  In the Dred Scott decision of 1857, the Supreme Court had said that African-Americans were not citizens. This amendment declared that every person born or naturalized in the U.S. was a citizen. The amendment’s “due process” clause has had enormous constitutional importance, since the Supreme Court has used it to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states. The amendment also establishes that all citizens are entitled to “equal protection of the laws,” the provision which the Supreme Court cited in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, ruling school segregation unconstitutional.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XV (1870)

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

  This amendment was designed to protect the right of African-Americans to vote and has served as the foundation for such legislation as the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XVI (1913)

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.   In 1895 the Supreme Court had declared a federal income tax law unconstitutional. This amendment reversed that decision and authorized a tax on income.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XVII (1913)

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

  The original system of having state legislatures elect U.S. senators began to break down with the growth of political parties in the mid-19th century.  Disagreements between and within parties produced deadlocks that delayed state legislative business and left states without their full Senate representation, often for lengthy periods. This amendment provides for senators to be elected the way members of the House are—by direct election of the people.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XVIII (1919)

Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

Section 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

  The “noble experiment” of Prohibition was instituted by this amendment, only to be repealed 14 years later by the 21st amendment.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XIX (1920)

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

  The Constitution has never prohibited women from voting and for many years before the adoption of this amendment women did vote in several states. The 19th amendment established a uniform rule for all states to follow in guaranteeing women this right.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XX (1933)

Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

Section 4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

Section 5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.

Section 6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

  This so-called “Lame-Duck” amendment reduced the previous four-month period between the November elections and the March 4 starting date of congressional and presidential terms. This ended the custom, when both terms expired on the same day, that required outgoing presidents to sit outside the Senate chamber waiting to sign last-minute legislation. Also, under this amendment, if a presidential election were thrown into the House of Representatives following a deadlock in the January 6 counting of electoral ballots, that decision would be made by a newly elected House rather than one set to go out of existence on March 4.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XXI (1933)

Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2.  The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

Section 3.  This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

  In repealing Prohibition, this was the only amendment that the states ratified by conventions rather than by legislatures.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XXII (1951)

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

  George Washington established the custom of presidents serving no longer than two terms. Following Franklin D. Roosevelt’s election to third and fourth terms, this amendment set a future limit at two terms.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XXIII (1961)

Section 1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

  In authorizing the creation of a federal district as seat of government, the Framers made no provision for the suffrage rights of persons who resided there. This amendment for the first time, effective with the 1964 election, gave District of Columbia residents the opportunity to vote for three presidential electors.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XXIV (1964)

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

  The poll tax was the last surviving instance of a property qualification for the suffrage, and it was in effect, at the time of the adoption of this amendment, in only five States. The amendment was offered as a removal of another obstacle to the right to vote.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XXV (1967)

Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

Section 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

  This amendment clarifies the Constitution’s previously ambiguous language about presidential succession, explicitly confirming the long-standing custom that when a president dies in office the vice president becomes president, rather than acts as president.

If the vice presidency becomes vacant, the president may nominate a new vice president, subject to the confirmation of both the House and Senate.  The amendment also provides procedures for replacing a president who becomes incapacitated.

 
 
 

 

Amendment XXVI (1971)

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

  During the Vietnam War, this amendment lowered the voting age in federal and state elections to 18, the same age at which young men could be drafted for military service.
 
 
 

 

Amendment XXVII (1992)

No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.   More than two hundred years after it was proposed as part of the original Bill of Rights, this amendment prohibited members of Congress from receiving an increase in salary until after the next election had been held.
 
 

S.PUB.103-21 Prepared by the Office of the Secretary of the Senate with the assistance of Johnny H. Killian of the Library of Congress.

 

CRUMMY FORMER PRO GMO SCIENTIST WRITES A WARNING!!!

555561_492841437438140_906386945_n

HERE ARE THE PUBLISHED WORDS OF A FORMER GMO SCIENTIST

AND THEY SHOULD SCARE YOU RIGHT INTO EATING ORGANIC!

459114_503552129700404_896752082_o

http://www.fooddemocracynow.org/blog/2013/may/6/former_pro_gmo_scientist_talks_dangers_of_GMOs/

Pasted Graphic gmo science

Former Pro-GMO Scientist Speaks Out On The Real Dangers of Genetically Engineered Food
Posted by Dave on May 6, 2013

By Thierry Vrain,

I retired 10 years ago after a long career as a research scientist for Agriculture Canada. When I was on the payroll, I was the designated scientist of my institute to address public groups and reassure them that genetically engineered crops and foods were safe. There is, however, a growing body of scientific research – done mostly in Europe, Russia, and other countries – showing that diets containing engineered corn or soya cause serious health problems in laboratory mice and rats.

I don’t know if I was passionate about it but I was knowledgeable. I defended the side of technological advance, of science and progress.

I have in the last 10 years changed my position. I started paying attention to the flow of published studies coming from Europe, some from prestigious labs and published in prestigious scientific journals, that questioned the impact and safety of engineered food.

I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies that their engineered crops yield more, that they require less pesticide applications, that they have no impact on the environment and of course that they are safe to eat.

There are a number of scientific studies that have been done for Monsanto by universities in the U.S., Canada, and abroad. Most of these studies are concerned with the field performance of the engineered crops, and of course they find GMOs safe for the environment and therefore safe to eat.

Individuals should be encouraged to make their decisions on food safety based on scientific evidence and personal choice, not on emotion or the personal opinions of others.

We should all take these studies seriously and demand that government agencies replicate them rather than rely on studies paid for by the biotech companies.

The Bt corn and soya plants that are now everywhere in our environment are registered as insecticides. But are these insecticidal plants regulated and have their proteins been tested for safety? Not by the federal departments in charge of food safety, not in Canada and not in the U.S.

There are no long-term feeding studies performed in these countries to demonstrate the claims that engineered corn and soya are safe. All we have are scientific studies out of Europe and Russia, showing that rats fed engineered food die prematurely.

These studies show that proteins produced by engineered plants are different than what they should be. Inserting a gene in a genome using this technology can and does result in damaged proteins. The scientific literature is full of studies showing that engineered corn and soya contain toxic or allergenic proteins.

Genetic engineering is 40 years old. It is based on the naive understanding of the genome based on the One Gene – one protein hypothesis of 70 years ago, that each gene codes for a single protein. The Human Genome project completed in 2002 showed that this hypothesis is wrong.

The whole paradigm of the genetic engineering technology is based on a misunderstanding. Every scientist now learns that any gene can give more than one protein and that inserting a gene anywhere in a plant eventually creates rogue proteins. Some of these proteins are obviously allergenic or toxic.

I have drafted a reply to Paul Horgen’s letter to the Comox Valley Environmental Council. It is my wish that it goes viral as to educate as many people as possible rapidly. Any and all social media is fine by me. This can also be used as a briefing note for the councilors of AVICC or anywhere else. Thank you for your help. [Original source with replies from Dr. Paul Horgen]

Thierry Vrain
Innisfree Farm

906987_550436251662856_1763514098_o

I am turning you towards a recent compilation (June 2012) of over 500 government reports and scientific articles published in peer reviewed Journals, some of them with the highest recognition in the world. Like The Lancet in the medical field, or Advances in Food and Nutrition Research, or Biotechnology, or Scandinavian Journal of Immunology, European Journal of Histochemistry, Journal of Proteome Research, etc … This compilation was made by a genetic engineer in London, and an investigative journalist who summarized the gist of the publications for the lay public.

GMO Myths and Truths – an evidence based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops. A report of 120 pages, it can be downloaded for free from Earth Open Source. “GMO Myths and Truths” disputes the claims of the Biotech industry that GM crops yield better and more nutritious food, that they save on the use of pesticides, have no environmental impact whatsoever and are perfectly safe to eat. Genetic pollution is so prevalent in North and South America where GM crops are grown that the fields of conventional and organic grower are regularly contaminated with engineered pollen and losing certification. The canola and flax export market from Canada to Europe (a few hundreds of millions of dollars) were recently lost because of genetic pollution. Did I mention superweeds, when RoundUp crops pass their genes on to RoundUp Resistant weeds. Apparently over 50% of fields in the USA are now infested and the growers have to go back to use other toxic herbicides such as 2-4 D. Many areas of Ontario and Alberta are also infested. The transgenes are also transferred to soil bacteria. A chinese study published last year shows that an ampicillin resistance transgene was transferred from local engineered crops to soil bacteria, that eventually found their way into the rivers. The transgenes are also transferred to humans. Volunteers who ate engineered soybeans had undigested DNA in their intestine and their bacterial flora was expressing the soybean transgenes in the form of antibiotic resistance. This is genetic pollution to the extreme, particularly when antibiotic resistance is fast becoming a serious global health risk. I can only assume the American Medical Association will soon recognize its poorly informed judgement.

In 2009 the American Academy of Environmental Medicine called for a moratorium of GM foods, safety testing and labeling. Their review of the available literature at the time noted that animals show serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signaling, and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system. Monsanto writes “There is no need to test the safety of GM foods”. So long as the engineered protein is safe, foods from GM crops are substantially equivalent and they cannot pose any health risks.” The US Food and Drug Administration waived all levels of safety testing in 1996 before approving the commercialization of these crops. Nothing more than voluntary research is necessary, and the FDA does not even want to see the results. And there is certainly no need to publish any of it. If you remember 1996, the year that the first crops were commercialized, the research scientists of the US FDA all predicted that transgenic crops would have unpredictable hard to detect side effects, allergens, toxins, nutritional effects, new diseases. That was published in 2004 in Biotechnology if you recall seeing it.

I know well that Canada does not perform long term feeding studies as they do in Europe. The only study I am aware of from Canada is from the Sherbrooke Hospital in 2011, when doctors found that 93% of pregnant women and 82% of the fetuses tested had the protein pesticide in their blood. This is a protein recognized in its many forms as mildly to severely allergenic. There is no information on the role played by rogue proteins created by the process of inserting transgenes in the middle of a genome. But there is a lot of long term feeding studies reporting serious health problems in mice and rats. The results of the first long term feeding studies of lab rats reported last year in Food and Chemical Toxicology show that they developed breast cancer in mid life and showed kidney and liver damage. The current statistic I read is that North Americans are eating 193 lbs of GMO food on average annually. That includes the children I assume, not that I would use that as a scare tactic. But obviously I wrote at length because I think there is cause for alarm and it is my duty to educate the public.

One argument I hear repeatedly is that nobody has been sick or died after a meal (or a trillion meals since 1996) of GM food. Nobody gets ill from smoking a pack of cigarette either. But it sure adds up, and we did not know that in the 1950s before we started our wave of epidemics of cancer. Except this time it is not about a bit of smoke, it’s the whole food system that is of concern. The corporate interest must be subordinated to the public interest, and the policy of substantial equivalence must be scrapped as it is clearly untrue.

Thierry Vrain, Former research scientist for Agriculture Canada and now promoting awareness of the dangers of genetically modified foods.

Originally published: Prevent Disease.

IT GETS BETTER!

During the gay marriage media blitz our elected traitors snuck through “The Monsanto Protection Act” as part of another bill! This is Congress’ favorite tactic to get what they want done – amend a bill that has a great chance of passing! They passed it through and it was signed into law by the occupant of the White House!

To put it bluntly we were screwed!

Monsanto is now untouchable!!!

541136_491874230868194_1257593857_n

Keep in mind that all of the GMO engineering is part of the elites’ plan to depopulate the world!

Their ideal population numbers are 500,000 million world wide!

An easy way to eliminate large numbers of the population is through diseases, hence the push with GMO’s, vaccinations and all the new mysterious illnesses that keep sweeping through various countries! Once they destroy our health, we will offer little resistance to their world domination plans! We need to become extremely diligent in maintaining our health, because without health nothing else matters!

17029_367224910029639_1819143880_n

CRUMMY RACISM IS PROGRESSIVE!

A LITTLE HISTORY

THAT IS NO LONGER

TAUGHT IN OUR SCHOOLS!

9110_353486588105159_1794098238_n

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/345274

NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com

Progressive Racism

By Paul A. Rahe

April 11, 2013 4:00 A.M.

One hundred years ago today, Woodrow Wilson brought Jim Crow to the North. He had been inaugurated on March 4, 1913. At a cabinet meeting on April 11, his postmaster general, Albert S. Burleson, suggested that the new administration segregate the railway mail service; and treasury secretary William G. McAdoo, who would soon become Wilson’s son-in-law, chimed in to signal his support. Wilson followed their lead. He had made a bid for the African-American vote in 1912, and he had attracted the support of figures such as W. E. B. Du Bois, but, as he put it at the meeting, he had made “no promises in particular to Negroes, except to do them justice.” Burleson’s proposal he welcomed, but he wanted “the matter adjusted in a way to make the least friction.”

Today, self-styled progressives are wont, with considerable abandon, to label as racists those who object to their attempts at social engineering. They would do well to rein in their rhetorical excesses and curb their enthusiasm for the administrative state — for the Progressives of yesteryear, on whom they model themselves, really were racists in the precise and proper sense of the term, and in formulating public policy they were true to their principles.

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, ordinary Americans may generally have been in the grips of ethnic prejudice of one sort or another. The Progressives of that time were not, however, ordinary men, and they knew it. Like their successors today, they dominated America’s universities. With some justification, they thought of themselves as an intellectual elite; and, with rare exceptions, they enthusiastically embraced eugenics and racial theory. That the inchoate racial prejudices of their contemporaries were grounded in fact they took to be a truth taught by science; and, being devotees of rational administration to the exclusion of all other concerns, they insisted that public policy conform to the dictates of the new racial science.

Wilson, our first professorial president, was a case in point. He was the very model of a modern Progressive, and he was recognized as such. He prided himself on having pioneered the new science of rational administration, and he shared the conviction, dominant among his brethren, that African-Americans were racially inferior to whites. With the dictates of Social Darwinism and the eugenics movement in mind, in 1907, he campaigned in Indiana for the compulsory sterilization of criminals and the mentally retarded; and in 1911, while governor of New Jersey, he proudly signed into law just such a bill.

Prior to the segregation of the civil service in 1913, appointments had been made solely on merit as indicated by the candidate’s performance on the civil-service examination. Thereafter, racial discrimination became the norm. Photographs came to be required at the time of application, and African-Americans knew they would not be hired. The existing work force was segregated. Many African-Americans were dismissed. In the postal service, others were transferred to the dead-letter office, where they had no contact with the general public. Those who continued to work in municipal post offices labored behind screens — out of sight and out of mind. When the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the National Independent Political League objected to the new policy, Wilson — a Presbyterian elder who was nothing if not high-minded — vigorously defended it, arguing that segregation was in the interest of African-Americans. For 35 years, segregation in the civil service would be public policy. It was only after Adolf Hitler gave eugenics and “scientific racism” a bad name that segregation came to seem objectionable.

If Wilson’s new policy encountered little opposition, it was because a change of sentiment had taken place. Jim Crow had not been the norm before 1890, even in the deep South. As C. Vann Woodward noted nearly 60 years ago, in The Strange Career of Jim Crow, it became the norm there only when it received sanction from the racist Progressives in the North. Their influence was profound and pervasive. In 1900, E. L. Godkin, founder and longtime editor of The Nation, saw the handwriting on the wall. In the pages of that journal, he lamented that “the Declaration of Independence no longer arouses enthusiasm; it is an embarrassing instrument which requires to be explained away. The Constitution is said to be ‘outgrown.’” Those who once “boasted that it had secured for the negro the rights of humanity and citizenship” now listen “in silence to the proclamation of white supremacy” and make “no protest against the nullifications of the Fifteenth Amendment.”

Wilson championed the trend identified by Godkin. In his presidential campaign in 1912, he told his compatriots, “We are in the presence of a new organization of society.” Our time marks “a new social stage, a new era of human relationships, a new stage-setting for the drama of life,” and “the old political formulas do not fit the present problems: they read now like documents taken out of a forgotten age.” What Thomas Jefferson had once taught is now, he contended, utterly out of date. It is “what we used to think in the old-fashioned days when life was very simple.”

Above all, Wilson wanted to persuade his compatriots to get “beyond the Declaration of Independence.” That document “did not mention the questions of our day,” he told his countrymen. “It is of no consequence to us.” He regarded it as “an eminently practical document, meant for the use of practical men; not a thesis for philosophers, but a whip for tyrants; not a theory of government, but a program of action.” For the rights of individuals celebrated in that document and for the limits on the scope of government implicit in its celebration of those particular rights, he had no use. They were, he recognized, an obstacle to rational administration of the very sort exemplified by his subsequent segregation of the civil service.

For similar reasons, Wilson was hostile to the constitutional provisions intended as a guarantee of limited government. The separation of powers, the balances and checks, and the distribution of authority between nation and state distinguishing the American constitution he regarded as an obstacle to the formation and pursuit of rational public policy. “Government” he considered “not a machine, but a living thing . . . accountable to Darwin, not to Newton.” Nothing of that sort could, he believed, “have its organs offset against each other, as checks, and live.” Its health was “dependent upon” the “quick co-operation” of these organs, “their ready response to the commands of instinct or intelligence, their amicable community of purpose.” Wilson was the first to call for there to be a “living” political constitution “Darwinian in structure and in practice.” To this end, in running for the presidency he openly sought “permission — in an era in which ‘development,’ ‘evolution,’ is the scientific word — to interpret the Constitution according to Darwinian principle.”

Today’s progressives eschew Social Darwinism and the pseudo-scientific racism espoused by their intellectual forebears, and they oppose racial segregation and the sterilization of criminals and the mentally retarded. But they are no less confident of their own righteousness than were the Progressives of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and they have no more respect for the rights espoused in the Declaration of Independence, for limited government, and for constitutional forms than did their predecessors. On this day, the hundredth anniversary of Wilson’s segregation of the civil service, they ought to reflect on the terrible damage apt to be done by an unlimited government disdainful of the natural rights of man and dedicated to rational administration as envisaged by fallible men.

— Paul A. Rahe, a professor of history at Hillsdale College, is the author of Soft Despotism, Democracy’s Drift.

Permalink

40829_10151345271745773_1494330952_n

That sums it up!

 

CRUMMY USA DOLLAR KILLERS ARE READY TO MOVE!

THE NIGHTMARE IS HERE!

546252_10150626504920773_959362253_n

The plans are almost complete for the destruction of the American monetary system!

THIS IS CRITICAL INFORMATION!!!

62942_471919739522034_1498899530_n

IF YOU WANT TO SURVIVE WHAT IS COMING YOU HAVE TO PREPARE – NOW!

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/54163

 Intelligence insider: Obama administration agenda to “kill U.S Dollar”

Is there any defensible scenario for this administration to want to “kill the dollar?”

Intelligence insider: Obama administration agenda to “kill U.S Dollar”

photo_12 

Doug Hagmann (Bio and Archives)  Monday, April 1, 2013

This week, I had a series of very sobering discussions with my highly-placed source within the intelligence world. The information he provided hit me like a proverbial tons of bricks. It connects everything we are seeing play out across the world, from the economic problems in Europe to the U.S. DHS ammunition acquisition orders and even the “gun control” debate. If you’re like me, you’re looking for clarity, context and focus with regard to all of the events we’re constantly hearing about but seem to lack legitimate explanation. I believe this report will provide the context and clarity we are all seeking, but I must warn you that the picture is not pretty.
Some might be surprised to learn that the fate of America’s economy has already been determined, verified and announced by the Obama White House. Yet, it has received scant attention from the corporate media. In 2011, economist Kyle Bass interviewed a senior member of the Obama administration about its planned solutions for fixing the US economy and trade deficit[ia].The economic agenda: In plain sight

Among the questions he asked was about U.S. exports and wages, but the question itself was not nearly as important as the response he received from this senior administration official. In fact, this single, seven word response clarifies everything, explains everything, and leaves little else to discuss: “We’re just going to kill the dollar.”

There it is, the entire agenda in one short sentence. It explains everything we’ve been seeing domestically and globally. That one statement makes every other question irrelevant, or otherwise answers all economic questions and explains everything. Nothing else matters. I urge you to ponder that statement and all that it implies. Doing so will provide you with the clarity to understand not only what is taking place today, but what is yet to come.

Murder & High Treason

It is important to note the specificity of the word “kill.” Stated in the active voice, it means an unambiguously intentional and deliberate act. The murder of our national currency, the United States Dollar (USD), is the ultimate agenda to be implemented under Obama. To “kill” our national currency will subvert the United States and destroy it from within. This begs a number of questions, including what type of Americans would actually have, as their objective, the destruction of our national currency? To whom do they hold their allegiance, if not to the American people whose life’s work as well as the toil of our ancestors is represented in the form of wealth held in U.S. dollars? Does this make any sense to us, as Americans? The answer of course is “no.”

By its very definition, to kill our national currency is an act of high treason by those engaged in this activity. It undermines the very sovereignty and survival of our nation, and will have a life-changing impact on every citizen in the U.S. It will also impact every nation and the people of every nation on the planet, as the USD is presently the world’s reserve currency. It is an act that should result in the filing of criminal charges against the conspirators, a trial of their peers and if convicted, a death sentence. It’s that serious.

According to my source, we are past the point of no return. We will not be able to stop what is coming, but must be wise enough to prepare and “get out of the way.” The murder plot involving the death of the dollar did not begin with Obama, but he and other conspirators have accelerated the plans, plots and schemes for its demise.

The ultimate objective

The ultimate objective is to implement an international currency in tandem with a system of global governance. The problem is that most people are not thinking large enough, nor do they understand the magnitude of the lie. They are not seeing the larger picture as their focus is diverted elsewhere. For example, they focus on various tentacles of the octopus such as the gun confiscation initiative, the DHS armament acquisitions and economic woes as independent and unrelated events. They are not.

Meanwhile, others continue to adhere to, or even perpetuate the dual party meme of governance, holding dearly to the notion that there is a practical difference between the Republican and Democrat parties. Have we not seen sufficient evidence that they are now of one party acting in concert with each other? They cannot see the collusion and backroom deals, and continue to hope that the next election will finally change the unchangeable continuity of agenda.

Most of the elected officials are onboard with the subjugation of the United States to a global system of governance. Some are actively facilitating this agenda, while others are making nominal objections on the stage of political theater while hoping to earn a seat at the global table. It’s entertainment for the globalists, distraction of the masses, and diversionary fodder for the talking heads in the media.

America has become a captured operation – captured from within. Think of the Vichy French, internal collaboration with the enemy, or softening the ground for a full takeover from within. The takeover of America has already happened, the collaborators have already been installed, and we are now on a path to complete subjugation of a larger global system of governance. If you continue to doubt this, how else would you explain the numerous examples of our dual-party governmental acquiescence of self destruction?

“Signs, signs, everywhere signs…”

Those who are pleased about the new record setting stock-market highs and various other manipulated statistics that indicate our economy is improving will be the most vocal critics of this report and who will attempt to discredit the validity of the information offered here. The more intellectually astute will look beyond the statistics offered for mass consumption not only to identify the deliberately manipulated data, but to understand what is actually driving these false hopes, figures and data. It is a magic show, and many are still captivated by the magicians’ many diversions, failing to realize that we are engaged in a global war while being simultaneously hobbled by enemy infiltrators from within.

One reason we are seeing new stock market highs is the rush to the dollar from other currencies, especially in the Eurozone. Another reason is the monetization of our debt by the Federal Reserve, despite the previous denials of Ben Bernanke and others.

Simply put, the plan by the globalists, or the central bankers and those behind them, is to create this rush to the USD like passengers from sinking ships to lifeboats. Once the lifeboats are filled to capacity, they will be sunk, and the United States Dollar will be completely worthless. As in such a scenario, many will not make it. Many will die from what is coming. The level of evil behind this plan is incomprehensible to the normal human mind.

Russia, China, Syria and Iran

As I detailed in my multiple reports about Benghazi, we are at war with Russia. After removing Qaddafi from power in Libya, the Obama-Clinton black-ops plan was immediately put into action. Benghazi was the logistics hub for arming the anti-Assad terrorists by our own State Department covert operatives who were shipping millions of tons of weapons to Syria via Turkey and other staging areas. Russia was aware of our actions, and through the attack at the CIA operations center in Benghazi by proxy forces, exposed this operation to the world while putting a stop to this operation. It seems that everyone except the Western media reported what had taken place.

The “dirty little secret” that explains why we have not been told the truth about Benghazi is quite simple. The efforts to overthrow Assad from power are continuing, except the arms and munitions shipments are now originating primarily from Croatia. Overthrowing Assad would pose a direct threat to Russia, both militarily and economically. Are we to expect Russia’s Putin to simply accept this without response? No. So what is Russia doing to subvert our efforts? He is waging war against America, striking at the weak underbelly of our economy which is the “oil backed” dollar as identified in Michael Reagan’s article, Building on a Kernel of Truth.

Sadly, the Obama regime is doing nothing to protect us from this asymmetrical war. It’s as if they are allowing it to take place.

Although it was reported in The New York Times, few have paid attention to last week’s meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, but it was an extremely important event in terms of the planned murder of the U.S. dollar. An alliance is being forged between Russia and China to replace the USD as the reserve currency, already severely weakened by the policies of those in power, with a gold backed currency. Russia and China are hoarding gold to levels never before seen, while the U.S. issues worthless paper and digital currency backed by… nothing, save for the “oil-backed” scenario.

While reports do exist that cite the hoarding of gold by China and Russia, they are purposely under reporting their collective reserves. Meanwhile, Americans can’t even get honest answers to the amounts of our own gold reserves held in Fort Knox or the Federal Reserve. Don’t people find this reluctance for audit and inspection a bit curious if not outright suspicious?

The battle is being waged not only by military might but by a currency war. We are “being played” through our military involvement in the Middle East, including our covert operations against Syria at the behest of Saudi Arabia. Unlike Iraq, the war in Syria will explode, turn hot, and we will be engaged in an ominous battle that will quickly expand and turn deadly. Weakened militarily through the policies of the Obama regime, coupled with an already weakened economy, the U.S. will suffer consequences unlike anyone might imagine or is willing to address. It is a recipe for disaster planned and initiated by the global elite behind the central banking system, including those in our own government. We have been set up from within, lied to, and now, we are about to see exactly what this globalist system has in store for not only the United States, but every nation of the world.

It is critical to understand that the take-down of the U.S. will be the result of an asymmetrical war that includes the weakening of our military, our economy, and a direct assault on our ability to keep the dollar as the world reserve currency and protect the free flow of oil and energy to the United States.

Within the last week, China held a surprise naval exercise in the South China Sea. Meanwhile, Russia displayed their resurgent military night in the Black Sea. These exercises were conducted as U.S. military forces are spread thinly across many areas in the world. Is anyone paying attention here?

Just as certain a collapse of the dollar is coming, so will be chaos on the streets of America caused by this plan “to kill the dollar.” The central bankers and the leaders selected to govern each country have effectively used the Hegelian Dialectic[ii] to implement their agenda. Just as stated by George H.W. Bush on September 11, 1990, their predetermined solution of a “New World Order” is being formed before our very eyes. They’ve told us what they are doing, but we have chosen not to listen or failed to understand what was being said.

The U.S. has always been the firewall against the globalists. By their persistence, infiltration of global elitists into our government, and covert subversion from within, we are being led to slaughter. A view from space, looking at the larger picture of events for which many have questions, a clearer picture emerges. There will be some who dare to resist the pillaging of our bank accounts, the erosion of our rights, and the enslavement that comes with the dismantling of America.

The dust clouds visible on the far horizon that watchmen have been reporting for decades can now be seen as an attacking army of barbarians, whose fighters are now on the ladders and cannons are breaching our empire’s outer walls. Who knows how long the inner walls of our empire will survive the next wave of their coming attack.

Perhaps Ernest Hemmingway said it best in referencing John Donne from his novel of the same name… “And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.”
[ia] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V3kpKzd-Yw&feature=youtu.be

[ii] http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm

(37) Comments

Copyright © Douglas Hagmann
Douglas J. Hagmann and his son, Joe Hagmann host
The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, a live Internet radio program broadcast each weeknight from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET.

Douglas Hagmann, founder & director of the Northeast Intelligence Network, and a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website.

Doug can be reached at: director@homelandsecurityus.com

Older articles by Doug Hagmann

If this information did not scare you into preparedness – 

528553_3559963296354_1943018002_n

You need to read it all again!

181093_526563634048544_2096977573_n

We have been at the mercy of Congress for many years –

the two party system is a sham for our benefit –

to keep the illusion alive that things are normal –

nothing to worry about!

Just remember this –

893201_495948297119178_2018201764_o crop

Now go and get prepared to survive!