061609 News As Talked About On The Harry Thomas Show week in review

===============================================================================

    Harry Thomas Show RSS Podcast Subscribe Today 

===============================================================================

DoD Training Manual Describes Protest As “Low-Level Terrorism”

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Monday, June 15, 2009

Current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the U.S. constitutes terrorist activity.

The ACLU has written to the DoD regarding its Antiterrorism and Force Protection Annual Refresher Training Course, which advises personnel that political protest amounts to “low-level terrorism”.

“It has come to our attention that the Department of Defense’s Annual Level I Antiterrorism (AT) Training for 2009 misinforms Department of Defense (DoD) personnel that certain First Amendment-protected activity may amount to “low level terrorism” The ACLU writes.

“We are writing to ask that you take immediate steps to remedy this situation.” the letter to acting Under-Secretary Gail McGinn states.

A PDF of the ACLU’s letter also contains print outs of the relevant sections of the course material.

The training introduction reads:

“Anti-terrorism (AT) and Force Protection (FP) are two facets of the Department of Defense (DoD) Mission Assurance Program. It is DoD policy, as found in DoD I 2000.16, that the DoD Components and the DoD elements and personnel shall be protected from terrorist acts through a high priority, comprehensive, AT program. The DoD’s AT program shall be all encompassing using an integrated systems approach.”

The first question of the Terrorism Threat Factors, “Knowledge Check 1″ section reads:

Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism activity?

Select the correct answer and then click Check Your Answer.

• Attacking the Pentagon
• IEDs
• Hate crimes against racial groups
• Protests

In order to proceed, users must give the “correct” answer as “Protests”.

According to the document, all DoD personnel are required to complete the course on a yearly basis.

The ACLU points out that although in and of itself the classification of protest as terrorism is deeply disturbing, it is even more alarming when viewed in the context of the Pentagon’s long term efforts to crack down on organized dissent.

The surveillance and pre-emptive arrest of protesters, on charges of “domestic terrorism”, at last year’s RNC by the FBI is also cited by the ACLU.

Other precedents that the ACLU neglected to mention in it’s letter include, most recently, the fact that the FBI were spying on “Tea Party” protesters nationwide.

One week prior to those revelations, we also reported that the Maryland National Guard was put on alert in anticipation of the nationwide protests, while a Homeland Security spokesman refused to deny that protesters would be under surveillance from the DHS.

The Maryland National Guard issued a Force Protection Advisory on April 11 which warned the National Guard to be on alert during the Tea Party protests because Guardsmen and Guard facilities might become “targets of opportunity.” The contact point for the document was listed as the Antiterrorism Program Coordinator.

The advisory was almost exactly the same as a United States Army Reserve Command Force Protection Advisory that was issued last November before the nationwide End the Fed protests, warning that protesters were congregating across the country to demonstrate against the private Federal Reserve.

Over the last few years we have seen countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists.

The continued surveillance of protesters, in addition to the ongoing agenda to equate dissent with terrorism, highlights the fact that the architecture of the police state, which was massively expanded under George W. Bush, has not been dismantled or relaxed by an Obama administration that promised “change,”. If anything, it has only grown bigger.

The Obama administration’s announcement that the illegal warrantless surveillance of American citizens, a program initiated under Bush, will continue and in fact intensify under Obama, is another shining example of the fact that - no matter who is in power and no matter the political persuasion of those being watched - all Americans who have the temerity to exercise constitutional rights are considered dangerous and worthy of being targeted by the federal government with surveillance tools supposedly introduced to fight terrorists.

===============================================================================

Pentagon Multiple Choice: Dissenting Americans are Terrorists

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
June 15, 2009

Last week the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California issued a press release demanding the Department of Defense stop teaching employees that dissent is a form of low-level terrorism. “Teaching employees that dissent on issues of public concern is something to be feared, rather than encouraged, is a dangerously counterproductive use of scarce security resources, making us less safe as a democracy,” Northern California ACLU Staff Attorney Ann Brick and ACLU Washington National Security Policy Council Michael German wrote in a letter to Gail McGinn, Acting Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.

	In the 1970s, the Pentagon, the CIA and the FBI, the National Guard, and various state and local police agencies worked in unison to snoop on and subvert the antiwar and civil rights movements.

A multiple choice question included on a Level 1 Antiterrorism Awareness training course required for all DoD personnel asks the following question: “Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorist activity?” The correct answer is “protests.” The ACLU wants the question removed.

“For the DoD to instruct its employees that lawful protest activities should be treated as ‘low-level terrorism’ is deeply disturbing in and of itself,” write Brick and German of the ACLU in the letter to Gail McGinn. “It is an even more egregious insult to constitutional values, however, when viewed in the context of a long-term pattern of domestic security initiatives that have attempted to equate lawful dissent with terrorism.”

Brick and German underscore documented military snooping on hundreds of legal anti-war and military protests, the FBI’s surveillance of protests at the RNC, and state police and sheriff departments covert surveillance of peace groups. “Policing ideas, rather than criminal activities, runs counter to our nation’s core principles, undermining the very foundations of the free society that the Department of Defense is dedicated to preserving.”

In fact, the Department of Defense is dedicated to preserving the criminal activity of the banksters and undermining the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

“I spent 33 years in the Marines. Most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism,” wrote the most decorated Marine in U.S. history, Smedley Butler, in his 1935 book, War Is a Racket. “Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints.”

Since Butler’s days, the Pentagon has vastly upgraded its Mafia techniques and has expanded its war to include the American people.

As Episcopal priest and activist Frank Morales notes, the Pentagon has declared war on America:

The “domestic war on terrorism” hinges upon the Pentagon’s doctrine of homeland defense. Mountains of repressive legislation are being enacted in the name of internal security. So called “homeland security”, originally set within the Pentagon’s “operations other than war”, is actually a case in which the Pentagon has declared war on America. Shaping up as the new battleground, this proliferating military “doctrine” seeks to justify new roles and missions for the Pentagon within America. Vast “legal” authority and funds to spy on the dissenting public, reconfigured as terrorist threats, is being lavished upon the defense, intelligence and law enforcement “community.”

“Here in America, all distinction between the military and police functions is about to be forever expunged with the looming repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act,” continues Morales. It is a “New World Law and Order” based on the repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act that requires a system of domestic and global counterinsurgency led by the Pentagon. “The objective is to centralize all intelligence gathering under one roof, the Department of Homeland Security and to widely cast the net over all of us, making certain that we all fall in line with the Pentagon Inc. agenda.”

In the 1970s, the Pentagon, the CIA and the FBI, the National Guard, and various state and local police agencies worked in unison to snoop on and subvert the antiwar and civil rights movements. “Back in the late 1960s and early ’70s the FBI, the military, local police and campus police had their own bailiwicks and limited powers” says Christopher Pyle, a former investigator for Senator Frank Church’s Select Committee on Intelligence in the 1970s. “But operating today through the JTTFs and the combined intelligence and fusion centers, which join military analysts with law enforcement specialists, they are all part of one big club, effectively destroying the Fourth Amendment against unlimited search and seizure.”

The “Big Club” and “Pentagon Inc” has sharpened its treasonous tools immeasurably since the day in 1969 when it opened a new war room in the basement of the Pentagon and created the headquarters of the Directorate for Civil Disturbance Planning and Operations. “In the fall of 1968, there were more Army Counter-lntelligence Analysis Branch personnel assigned to monitor domestic citizen protests than were assigned to any other counter-intelligence operation in the world, including Southeast Asia and the Vietnam War,” write Morton Halperin, Jerry Berman, Robert Borosage, Christine Marwick in their study on the crimes of U.S. intelligence agencies.

With the exception of the FBI, the military intelligence services collected more information on American politics in the sixties than any other federal agency. The army conducted a full-scale Pentagon operation within the United States, and the figures and attitudes reflect this approach. Where a civilian agency might have opened a hundred files, the military created a thousand; the army established CONUS and CONARC intelligence commands, and then reorganized and reinitiated them as USAINTC, the Directorate of Civil Disturbance Planning, and the Division of Military Support. They ran operations with such code names as GARDEN PLOT, ROSE BUSH, PUNCH BLOCK, STEEP HILL, LANTERN SPIKE, QUIET TOWN, GRAM METRIC, and CABLE SPLICER; and they developed intelligence “compendiums,” a “mug book,” daily, weekly and monthly intelligence summaries, special reports, “city packets,” contingency and alternative contingency plans, computerized filing systems, and crossover index files to information. All were based on agent spot reports, radio intercepts, incident and personality files, newspaper clippings and data from numerous civilian sources. Each level of the military hierarchy tried to placate its superiors by collecting as much or more information than the task required, whether it was of any importance or not. The attitude pervading these army operations was best stated by Robert E. Jordan III, general counsel to the army: “the people on the other side were essentially the enemy. The army conducted a de facto war against all citizen protest, legitimate and illegitimate, violent and peaceful, white and black.

Jordan’s remark is as pertinent today as it was 30 some odd years ago — the American people are the enemy and the de facto war is to be waged against all citizen protest. Index files have been replaced by quasi-supercomputing and DARPA’s Total Information Awareness, now deemed Terrorist Information Awareness.

For the Pentagon and its globalist overlords, today’s enemy consists of the so-called patriot movement, recently characterized as purveyors of “rightwing extremism” by the Department of Homeland Security.

It is no mistake the Fox News disinfo operative Glenn Beck has sidled up to constitutionalists and libertarians while characterizing 9/11 activists as a dire threat to the homeland in league with the CIA contrivance al-Qaeda. It is no mistake the corporate media and scribes working for George Soros have put in overtime to malign Alex Jones — largely considered the leader of the 9/11 movement — and attach him to a demented cop killer and a white supremacist who killed a security guard at a Holocaust museum.

It should come as no surprise a DoD Antiterrorism Awareness training course characterizes dissidents as “low level” terrorists. Such indoctrination and brainwashing will make it easier for soldiers and DHS paramilitaries — including “public-private partnership” (fascist) shock troops such as InfraGard and soon enough Obama’s “public service” Jugendbewegung — to not only round-up and intern dissidents but shoot them down in numbers as they were shot down in their millions by Stalin and Mao in the blood-soaked 20th century.

===============================================================================

Round up ‘hate speech’ promoters?

David Codrea
The Examiner
June 14, 2009

CBS News and U.S. News have posted a stunning, disturbing opinion piece by Bonnie Erbe. Here’s who she is, for those of you who may not be familiar with her work:

Bonnie Erbe is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report and hosts PBS’s weekly news analysis program, To the Contrary with Bonnie Erbe. She also writes a weekly syndicated newspaper column for Scripps Howard News Service.

Top credentials. Her voice is loud and reaches far. Here’s what it’s saying:

Round Up Hate-Promoters Now, Before Any More Holocaust Museum Attacks

Erbe takes her lead from a statement made by Playwright Janet Langhart Cohen on CNN following the Holocaust Museum shooting:

She said something must be done about ridding the Internet and the public dialogue of hate speech. I agree.

And what is that “something”?

Isn’t it time we started rounding up promoters of hate before they kill?

I don’t know, Bonnie, is it? Who is going to determine who the haters are? And without a Department of PreCrime, who can determine when one of them will kill? Who is going to be doing the round up? Are we going to maybe house them at Gitmo now that we’re clearing that place out? Any trials planned in your little fantasy?

And what do you suggest “we” do if some decide to resist the “round ups”?

Why is it your “Final Solution”…I mean, “Last Roundup” to oppose neo-Nazism sounds just like something the Nazis would do, Bonnie?

I note the chilling Ms. Erbe is affiliated with the Thomas Jefferson Street blog. I can’t help but wonder what she’d have to say about an extreme insurrectionist promulgating violent views like this:

the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it’s natural manure.

If Ms. Erbe and those like her get their wish, we will find out how deep that tree’s roots go, how wide its branches spread.

So who am I siding with, the haters?

From where I sit, that designation belongs to Ms. Erbe. And as far a neo-Nazis go, I can’t help but notice many of her political sympathies appear both national and socialist in scope.

My friend and colleague Mike Vanderboegh has sized things up well in his open letter to Erbe:

You wish to sweep away those that you find “hateful.” Have you ever considered that there are many who find your ideas “hateful?”

Most of the Founders understood that you should never pass a law that you wouldn’t be willing to see enforced upon you by your own worst enemy. (John Adams didn’t, but then he and his party were swept from power by the reaction to the Alien and Sedition Acts.) If you really believe what you wrote, and worse, get what you ask for, the resulting armed resistance to such a tyrannical proposal would sweep away the safe, mythical cocoon within which you seem to live.

And if you think that tyranny and civil war cannot come to this country, as divided ideologically and morally as we presently are, you are whistling past the graveyard of history.

A government that would do what Bonnie Erbe demands is the very reason Thomas Jefferson wrote:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it…

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

“Throw off.”

And how would they do that?

Tomorrow, barring any current events that might push it to a back burner, I’ll explore the limits of the First Amendment, what you’d have to do to abuse it to the point where others have a right to intervene. Contrary to common wisdom, you can yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater.

===============================================================================

How The Spooks Took Over the News

Nick Davies
Information Clearing House
June 14, 2009

On the morning of 9 February 2004, The New York Times carried an exclusive and alarming story. The paper’s Baghdad correspondent, Dexter Filkins, reported that US officials had obtained a 17-page letter, believed to have been written by the notorious terrorist Abu Musab al Zarqawi to the “inner circle” of al-Qa’ida’s leadership, urging them to accept that the best way to beat US forces in Iraq was effectively to start a civil war.

The letter argued that al-Qa’ida, which is a Sunni network, should attack the Shia population of Iraq: “It is the only way to prolong the duration of the fight between the infidels and us. If we succeed in dragging them into a sectarian war, this will awaken the sleepy Sunnis.”

Later that day, at a regular US press briefing in Baghdad, US General Mark Kimmitt dealt with a string of questions about The New York Times report: “We believe the report and the document is credible, and we take the report seriously… It is clearly a plan on the part of outsiders to come in to this country and spark civil war, create sectarian violence, try to expose fissures in this society.” The story went on to news agency wires and, within 24 hours, it was running around the world.

There is very good reason to believe that that letter was a fake – and a significant one because there is equally good reason to believe that it was one product among many from a new machinery of propaganda which has been created by the United States and its allies since the terrorist attacks of September 2001.

For the first time in human history, there is a concerted strategy to manipulate global perception. And the mass media are operating as its compliant assistants, failing both to resist it and to expose it.

The sheer ease with which this machinery has been able to do its work reflects a creeping structural weakness which now afflicts the production of our news. I’ve spent the last two years researching a book about falsehood, distortion and propaganda in the global media.

The “Zarqawi letter” which made it on to the front page of The New York Times in February 2004 was one of a sequence of highly suspect documents which were said to have been written either by or to Zarqawi and which were fed into news media.

This material is being generated, in part, by intelligence agencies who continue to work without effective oversight; and also by a new and essentially benign structure of “strategic communications” which was originally designed by doves in the Pentagon and Nato who wanted to use subtle and non-violent tactics to deal with Islamist terrorism but whose efforts are poorly regulated and badly supervised with the result that some of its practitioners are breaking loose and engaging in the black arts of propaganda.

Like the new propaganda machine as a whole, the Zarqawi story was born in the high tension after the attacks of September 2001. At that time, he was a painful thorn in the side of the Jordanian authorities, an Islamist radical who was determined to overthrow the royal family. But he was nothing to do with al-Q’aida. Indeed, he had specifically rejected attempts by Bin Laden to recruit him, because he was not interested in targeting the West.

Nevertheless, when US intelligence battered on the doors of allied governments in search of information about al-Q’aida, the Jordanian authorities – anxious to please the Americans and perhaps keen to make life more difficult for their native enemy – threw up his name along with other suspects. Soon he started to show up as a minor figure in US news stories – stories which were factually weak, often contradictory and already using the Jordanians as a tool of political convenience.

This coincided with a crucial vote in Congress in which the president was seeking authority to use military force against Iraq. Bush never named the man he was referring to but, as the Los Angeles Times among many others soon reported: “In a speech [on] Monday, Bush referred to a senior member of al-Q’aida who received medical treatment in Iraq. US officials said yesterday that was Abu al Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian, who lost a leg during the US war in Afghanistan.”

Even now, Zarqawi was a footnote, not a headline, but the flow of stories about him finally broke through and flooded the global media on 5 February 2003, when the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, addressed the UN Security Council, arguing that Iraq must be invaded: first, to stop its development of weapons of mass destruction; and second, to break its ties with al-Q’aida.

Powell claimed that “Iraq today harbours a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al Zarqawi”; that Zarqawi’s base in Iraq was a camp for “poison and explosive training”; that he was “an associate and collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al-Q’aida lieutenants”; that he “fought in the Afghan war more than a decade ago”; that “Zarqawi and his network have plotted terrorist actions against countries, including France, Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and Russia”.

Courtesy of post-war Senate intelligence inquiries; evidence disclosed in several European trials; and the courageous work of a handful of journalists who broke away from the pack, we now know that every single one of those statements was entirely false. But that didn’t matter: it was a big story. News organisations sucked it in and regurgitated it for their trusting consumers.

So, who exactly is producing fiction for the media? Who wrote the Zarqawi letters? Who created the fantasy story about Osama bin Laden using a network of subterranean bases in Afghanistan, complete with offices, dormitories, arms depots, electricity and ventilation systems? Who fed the media with tales of the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, suffering brain seizures and sitting in stationery cars turning the wheel and making a noise like an engine? Who came up with the idea that Iranian ayatollahs have been encouraging sex with animals and girls of only nine?

Some of this comes from freelance political agitators. It was an Iranian opposition group, for example, which was behind the story that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was jailing people for texting each other jokes about him. And notoriously it was Iraqi exiles who supplied the global media with a dirty stream of disinformation about Saddam Hussein.

But clearly a great deal of this carries the fingerprints of officialdom. The Pentagon has now designated “information operations” as its fifth “core competency” alongside land, sea, air and special forces. Since October 2006, every brigade, division and corps in the US military has had its own “psyop” element producing output for local media. This military activity is linked to the State Department’s campaign of “public diplomacy” which includes funding radio stations and news websites. In Britain, the Directorate of Targeting and Information Operations in the Ministry of Defence works with specialists from 15 UK psyops, based at the Defence Intelligence and Security School at Chicksands in Bedfordshire.

In the case of British intelligence, you can see this combination of reckless propaganda and failure of oversight at work in the case of Operation Mass Appeal. This was exposed by the former UN arms inspector Scott Ritter, who describes in his book, Iraq Confidential, how, in London in June 1998, he was introduced to two “black propaganda specialists” from MI6 who wanted him to give them material which they could spread through “editors and writers who work with us from time to time”.

In interviews for Flat Earth News, Ritter described how, between December 1997 and June 1998, he had three meetings with MI6 officers who wanted him to give them raw intelligence reports on Iraqi arms procurement. The significance of these reports was that they were all unconfirmed and so none was being used in assessing Iraqi activity. Yet MI6 was happy to use them to plant stories in the media. Beyond that, there is worrying evidence that, when Lord Butler asked MI6 about this during his inquiry into intelligence around the invasion of Iraq, MI6 lied to him.

Ultimately, the US has run into trouble with its propaganda in Iraq, particularly with its use of the Zarqawi story. In May 2006, when yet another of his alleged letters was handed out to reporters in the Combined Press Information Centre in Baghdad, finally it was widely regarded as suspect and ignored by just about every single media outlet.

Arguably, even worse than this loss of credibility, according to British defence sources, the US campaign on Zarqawi eventually succeeded in creating its own reality. By elevating him from his position as one fighter among a mass of conflicting groups, the US campaign to “villainise Zarqawi” glamorised him with its enemy audience, making it easier for him to raise funds, to attract “unsponsored” foreign fighters, to make alliances with Sunni Iraqis and to score huge impact with his own media manoeuvres. Finally, in December 2004, Osama bin Laden gave in to this constructed reality, buried his differences with the Jordanian and declared him the leader of al-Q’aida’s resistance to the American occupation.

===============================================================================

HR 1207: Battle To Audit The Fed Has Only Just Begun

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Friday, June 12, 2009

A great victory in the ongoing battle to wrestle back control of US monetary policy from privately owned special interests was won yesterday with the announcement that HR 1207, Ron Paul’s “audit the Fed” bill, will be debated by the full House of Representatives.

Months of activism on behalf of the Texas Congressman’s supporters finally paid off as Ohio Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich became the bill’s 218th co-sponsor, giving the bill the majority support it needed to move out of committee.

Though this is indeed cause for celebration, a much greater effort will be needed to ensure the bill is passed into law.

Before today, HR 1207’s companion bill in the Senate, S 604 The Federal Reserve Sunshine act, had no co-sponsors at all.

Ron Paul’s Campaign For Liberty has since reported that Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) has become the first cosponsor of S 604.

“We still have a long way to go before we pass real legislation to Audit the Fed, but this is yet another major step toward our ultimate goal.” writes Ron Paul’s Communications Director Jesse Benton.

Without support for S 604, the Senate may be able to block HR 1207 and other legislation seeking to audit the Fed.

And given that the Fed is set to do everything in its power to shoot down such legislation, we need to act fast.

We must get this bill some support, and make sure HR 1207 doesn’t get watered down along the way.

The key Senators to pressure on this bill are:

Kay Hutchison (R - TX) 202-224-5922 (on the Senate Banking Committee)

Robert Bennett (R - UT) (202) 224-5444 (on the Senate Banking Committee)

Other Senators on the Banking Committee can be found here:

http://www.opencongress.org/committee/show/146_senate_banking_housing_and_urban_affairs

Use this site to contact your reps:

http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/112

List of all senators & contact information:

http://senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

If passed, HR1207 will ensure that the Fed make public the destination of the trillions in taxpayer “loans” that have been simply handed over to private banks without oversight.

Bernanke will be seated before Congress and forced to answer these questions instead of worming his way out of them, citing “extraordinary circumstances” and the like, as we have seen him do over and over for the past eight months.

The bill, if it becomes law, will expose how the Fed has consistently engaged the inflation of the currency for the gain of a few elite international bankers, further exposing how this kind of criminal action has directly led to financial crises and recessions for decades.

An audit would set the stage for the end of fraudulent fractional reserve banking and a return of honest money and fiscal policies.

===============================================================================

Fed Would Be Shut Down If It Were Audited, Expert Says

CNBC
Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The Federal Reserve’s balance sheet is so out of whack that the central bank would be shut down if subjected to a conventional audit, Jim Grant, editor of Grant’s Interest Rate Observer, told CNBC.

With $45 billion in capital and $2.1 trillion in assets, the central bank would not withstand the scrutiny normally afforded other institutions, Grant said in a live interview.

“If the Fed examiners were set upon the Fed’s own documents—unlabeled documents—to pass judgment on the Fed’s capacity to survive the difficulties it faces in credit, it would shut this institution down,” he said. “The Fed is undercapitalized in a way that Citicorp is undercapitalized.”

VIDEO LINK

Full article here

===============================================================================

Audit the Fed Update

CongressmanRonPaul
June 12, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x797PnF06xY

===============================================================================

Fed to Hire PR Wizard to Fight Against HR 1207

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
June 6, 2009

As HR 1207 gains momentum and co-sponsors in the House of Representatives, the Federal Reserve is planning to fight the tide calling for an audit of its books by hiring a veteran lobbyist to “manage its relations with Congress,” according to Reuters.

Linda Robertson

The Fed plans to hire Linda Robertson, who previously worked for now-defunct energy company Enron, as well as the Clinton administration. She is currently head of government, community and public relations at The Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. Robertson “spent eight years in senior positions at the Treasury Department, working for three secretaries: Lloyd Bentsen, Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers,” a bio posted on The John Hopkins University website states.

Robert Rubin, as secretary of the Treasury, recommended that Congress pass legislation to reform or repeal the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, while Lawrence Summers in the same capacity organized the looting of Russia, stripping one trillion dollars from Russia’s struggling economy in the name of the bankers.

“Members of Congress have chafed at the Fed’s bold use of its emergency powers and in particular its multibillion-dollar bailouts of investment bank Bear Stearns and insurer American International Group,” Reuters continues. “Critics also bristle at the Fed’s practice of maintaining the confidentiality of the companies that borrow directly from the central bank on the grounds that divulging their names would risk runs on those institutions.”

One such critic is senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. In March, Sanders put it squarely to Fed boss Bernanke when he said “My question to you is, will you tell the American people to whom you lent $2.2 trillion of their dollars?” Bernanke, of course, refused to divulge a single name and instead said the loans in question are “over-collateralized” and thus come with a heavy stigma for the unknown borrowers.

Sanders has put his weight behind a similar bill — S. 604, the Federal Reserve Sunshine Act of 2009. It was referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs on March 16, 2009.

As reported by Bloomberg, the Fed has entered into trillions of dollars in off-balance sheet transactions since last September. More specifically, the Fed extended $9 trillion in credit, which is $30,000 for every single men, women, and child in this country.

Early last month, Elizabeth Coleman, Inspector General for the Federal Reserve, told Rep. Alan Grayson of the United States House Committee on Financial Services that she does “not have jurisdiction to directly go out and audit Reserve Bank activities specifically.”  See a video of Grayson questioning Coleman.

“We’re getting instructions from on high saying, ‘Don’t dwell on the past,’” Grayson was told before a hearing scheduled to investigate the Fannie and Freddie swindle.

VIDEO LINK

HR 1207 would put an end to this sort of hide-and-seek nonsense. It would “amend title 31, United States Code, to reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States and the manner in which such audits are reported, and for other purposes.”

Rep. Ron Paul notes that only the Fed can inflate the currency and create new money out of thin air in secrecy without oversight or supervision. “Debasing a currency is counterfeiting,” Paul told Congress in February, 2008, “it steals value from every dollar earned or saved. “It robs the people and makes them poorer… it is the enemy of the working person. Inflation is the most vicious and regressive of all forms of taxation. It transfers wealth from the middle class to the privileged rich.”

HR 1207 would cast a laser light on this criminal process. “By opening all Fed operations to a GAO audit and calling for such an audit to be completed by the end of 2010, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act would achieve much-needed transparency of the Federal Reserve,” Paul explained earlier this year.

An audit would set the stage for the end of the Federal Reserve and a return of honest money and fiscal policies. The banksters behind the Fed understand this very well and that is why they have not only hired a PR wizard but also why they have attempted to subvert the End the Fed movement.

It is hardly a mistake that the MIAC report characterized the End the Fed movement as extremist. It is also no mistake the United States Army Reserve Command issued “mitigation measures” in response to End the Fed demonstrations around the country last year. The Army “established relationships” with local law enforcement and the FBI and encouraged them to “update alert rosters,” according to a Force Protection Advisory leaked to the media. On November 22, 2008, Alex Jones led a rally at the Federal Reserve Bank in Dallas Texas. The Dallas protest is specifically mentioned in the official Army document.

As HR 1207 picks up sponsors and gains critical mass, we can expect the international bankers to devise ways to protect their Federal Reserve racket. Obviously, it will take more than a former Enron and Treasury Department hack to stem the growing tide of people demanding the Fed be investigated and eventually dismantled.

===============================================================================

President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Warns of Oligarchy

Washington’s Blog
Saturday, June 6, 2009

As I have previously pointed out, two top IMF officials and the former Vice President of the Dallas Federal Reserve have all warned that the U.S. has been taken over by an oligarchy.

Wednesday, the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Thomas Hoenig, agreed:

If we hesitate to make needed changes, we will perpetuate an oligarchy of interests that will fail to serve the best interests of business, the consumer and the U.S. economy…

In discussing any aspect of financial reform, one of the most significant changes that must be accomplished is the end of “Too Big to Fail” . . . Institutions must be allowed to fail, no matter their size or political influence…The effect is to lower the costs to these firms and significantly raise costs to the taxpayer and, ultimately, to fundamentally weaken our financial system.

===============================================================================

Why The Chinese Laughed At Geithner

Paul Craig Roberts
Infowars
June 4, 2009

If a person lives long enough, he can watch everyone forget everything they learned. 

	When will the Fed remember that printing money does not lower long-term interest rates?

Everyone includes Federal Reserve Chairmen, economists, Bank of America “strategists,” and even Bloomberg.com.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke thinks he can hold down US long-term interest rates by purchasing mortgage bonds and US Treasuries.  Sixty years ago the Federal Reserve understood that this was an impossible feat.  After an acrimonious public dispute with the US Treasury, in 1951 the Federal Reserve forced an “Accord” on the government that eliminated the Fed’s obligation to monetize Treasury debt in order to hold down long term interest rates.

President Truman and Treasury Secretary John Snyder wanted to protect World War II bond purchasers by preventing any rise in interest rates, which would mean a decline in the price of the bonds.

The Fed understood that monetizing the debt to hold down interest rates meant loss of control over the money supply.  The policy of suppressing interest rates could only work until the financial markets anticipated rising inflation and bid down the bond prices.  If the Fed responded by buying more Treasuries, the money supply and inflation would rise faster.  

Since Fed Chairman Bernanke announced his plan to purchase $1 trillion in mortgage and Treasury bonds in order to help the housing market with low interest rates, interest rates have risen.  When will the Fed remember that printing money does not lower long-term interest rates?

According to Bloomberg (June 3), Bank of America strategists are recommending that investors buy Fannie Mae bonds because the rise in interest rates means the Fed will ramp up its purchases in order to prevent rising interest rates from adversely impacting the struggling housing market.  When will financial gurus remember that printing money does not lower interest rates?

Treasury Secretary Geithner is another economic incompetent.  He told China that he stood for a “strong dollar,” but that China should let its currency appreciate relative to the dollar, which, of course, would mean a weaker dollar.  He simultaneously told China that their investments in US Treasury bonds were safe.

His Chinese university audience, being economically literate, laughed at Geithner. 

It apparently did not dawn on the US Treasury Secretary that if Chinese money is rising in value relative to the US dollar, the value of Chinese investments in dollar-denominated US Treasury bonds is falling.

Congressional Democrats are proving themselves to be as stupid as the Republicans.  According to the Associated Press, the Democrats have reached agreement to appropriate another $100 billion to continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through the end of the year. 

What are the Democrats thinking?  The federal budget for this year is already 50% in the red.  Why add another $100 billion to the red ink, which has to be monetized, thus causing inflation, higher interest rates, and a weaker dollar.

The red ink that Washington is generating is a far greater threat to Americans than any foreign “enemies.”

The hubris is extraordinary.  A bankrupt government that has to send its Treasury Secretary begging to China thinks it can spend limitless amounts in a futile effort to control the culture, mores, and political system of distant Afghanistan

===============================================================================

The Realm of Gangster Government

Infowars
June 12, 2009

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) speaking on the House floor: “Now we’ve moved into the realm of gangster government. We have gangster government when the Federal Government has set up a new cartel and private businesses now have to go begging with their hand out to their local–hopefully well politically connected–Congressman or their Senator so they can buy a peace offering for that local business. Is that the kind of country we are going to have in the future?”

 ===============================================================================

Elitist Confab in Montreal: Adapting to a New World Order – Day 1

Sam Labrier
Infowars
June 9, 2009

MONTREAL — Today marked the first day of the four-day Conference of Montreal, this year entitled “Adapting to a New World Order.” Present at the conference is a who’s who of international finance and politics, including the heads of the World Bank and the IMF, Presidents, Prime Ministers, and a large assortment of other Bilderberg and NWO elitists. Presiding over the whole affair is none other than Paul Desmarais Jr., a member of Montreal’s leading Bilderberg family. This is the fifteenth anniversary of the Conference of Montreal. The conference is taking place at the Bonaventure Hilton in downtown Montreal until Thursday.

The whole place was under a heavy police lockdown, and getting footage from inside was next to impossible without proper media credentials. Nonetheless we were able to get information from media sources inside about what is being discussed.

According to reporters we spoke with, today’s meetings dealt mostly with the economic crisis and what strategies should be employed to deal with it. When we asked if there was any mention of the North American Union, we were told that would be happening on Wednesday. One of the reporters gave us the schedule for the next four days and indeed, on Wednesday, there is a Luncheon at noon entitled “The Americas and the New World Order” headlined by Madeleine Albright which may or may not be a discussion of the North American Union. The descriptive blurb in the schedule describes it thusly: “How can the Americas make changes to play their part in the establishment of a more stable, and fair, basis for international prosperity?”

Several unmarked police cars escorted people out of the building all day, and though protesters burned an effigy of Mr. Desmarais on the sidewalk in front of the Hilton, no one was arrested. The police came along after the protesters had dispersed and extinguished the remaining embers.

Some notables from the list of guests this year include:

Madeleine Albright, Former U.S. Secretary of State
Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Managing Director, IMF
Robert Zoellick, President, The World Bank Group
Jean-Claude Trichet, President, European Central Bank
Guillermo Ortiz Martinez, Governor, Central Bank of Mexico
Mark Carney, Governor, Bank of Canada
Alvaro Uribe, President of the Republic of Colombia
Angel Gurria, Secretary-General, OECD

In addition there are numerous ministers from governments all over the globe and from the UN, as well as executives from General Electric, Goldman Sachs, Cisco Systems, GDF SUEZ, The Canadian Chamber of Commerce and others.

Each day of the conference has a different theme. Today’s theme was Economy and Governance. The meeting opened at 8:30 a.m. with a lecture from the head of the IMF, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, entitled: “Towards a New Global Order.” Other events today had titles like “A New World Governance” and “Thriving in a New Financial Order.” Cocktails after a long day of running the globe were at 5.

The themes for the next three days are:

Tuesday, June 9: Energy, Health and Sustainable Development
Wednesday, June 10: International Trade and the Americas
Thursday, June 11: International Finance

The closing luncheon on Thursday at noon entitled “The Economic Crisis and the Role of Central Banks: How Far Can They Go?” sounds like a snore-fest at first, with two Central Bank governors, Mexico’s and Canada’s, giving a speech. However, the lecture’s subtitle indicates that it is something we should all hear: “NAFTA and the Economic Recovery: The Required Joint Action Between North American Central Banks.”

A full list of all the events of the four-day conference can be downloaded in PDF form here: http://www.conferencedemontreal.com/fileadmin/pdf/2009/Program.pdf

===============================================================================

Margaret Sanger’s Case For Eugenics

Amy de Miceli
No One Has to Die Tomorrow
June 9, 2009

“The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics.” Birth Control Review, 1921

As the Founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger is considered a hero to many for bringing choice to women in America. However, it becomes obvious from Sanger’s own words and publications that she did not care about freedom of choice, but cared only for a superior race, and she had a plan to “prevent multiplication of this bad stock”.

Sanger was a member of the American Eugenics Society. She was a eugenicist who wanted to forcefully sterilize people, she wrote many articles and books on the subject. In 1922 she wrote The Pivot of Civilization, (HG Wells wrote the introduction)and she refers to people as “human weeds” and morons who did not deserve to have children. In The Case for Birth Control she offers a vague list of random reasons that would justify sterilization, it included anyone that was “poor” and people with children that are “not normal.” With such ambiguous standards, virtually anyone could be labeled as unfit.

Hitler admired the work of Margaret Sanger, and modeled many of his Eugenics Laws after America’s. Coincidentally, Hilter’s director of the Racial Hygiene Society, Ernst Rudin was the same man that Sanger had previously commissioned for her own agenda, publishing his work in her magazine, the Birth Control Review.

In 1939 Margaret Sanger began “The Negro Project”and to bring people along willingly she enlisted black preachers to support sterilization. She outlined the deceitful plan in a letter to Clarence Gamble of the Procter and Gamble Empire,

“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.”

Sanger’s personal “Plan for Peace” outlines what she really thought of our human rights.

The second step of her plan “would be to take an inventory of the secondary group such as illiterates, paupers, unemployable, criminals, prostitutes, dope-fiends; classify them in special departments under government medical protection, and segregate them on farms and open spaces as long as necessary for the strengthening and development of moral conduct.”

Margaret Sanger has been paraded around as an advocate for “women’s rights”, her historic value has been overinflated, and her dark history has been, (and is being) rewritten by the main stream media. Life Magazine for example, has even placed Margaret Sanger as one of the “most important people of the century” which may be true… if you are a eugenicist.

“The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

===============================================================================

Elite Bloodlines 2 sources

• The Astor Bloodline

• The Bundy Bloodline

• The Collins Bloodline

• The DuPont Bloodline

• The Freeman Bloodline

• The Kennedy Bloodline

• The Li Bloodline

• The Onassis Bloodline

• The Reynolds Bloodline

• The Rockefeller Bloodline

• The Rothschild Bloodline

• The Russell Bloodline

• The Van Duyn Bloodline

   

• Merovingian (European Royal Families)

• The Top 13 Families & The Mormon Leadership (Moriah & The Mormon Leadership)

Interconnected families:

• The Disney Bloodline

• The Krupp Bloodline

• The McDonald Bloodline

Introduction

 1 1.  The Astor Bloodline   

2. 2.  The Bundy Bloodline

3.3.  The Collins Bloodline

4.4. The DuPont Bloodline

5.5.  The Freeman Bloodline

6 6.  The Kennedy Bloodline

7 7.  The Li Bloodline

8.8. The Onassis Bloodline

9 9.  The Reynolds bloodline

110. The Rockefeller Bloodline

11. The Rothschild Bloodline

12. The Russell Bloodline

13. The Van Duyn Bloodline

[    Merovingian] (European Royal Families)

Interconnected families:

The Disney Bloodline

The Krupp Bloodline

The McDonald Bloodline

===============================================================================

Earth 2100: New World Order Agenda on Primetime Television

Information Liberation
June 7, 2009

After watching ABC’s Earth 2100 tonight I could not help but feel the sense of the New World Order’s hand on bringing this to television. Although it comes off as a hypothetical representation of the possible future of Earth in the next hundred years, the story behind the story is simply “depopulation”. With the environment as a front which is often the case with the New World Order’s Agenda the Illuminati’s premise of the Human Condition as the enemy and the need to decrease us in order to sustain this planet is clear and present see the Georgia Guidestones. You will notice the many references to the population explosion mentioned throughout the film. The potential reason for the FEMA camps and coffins might be explained with a surge in “environmental refugees fleeing to the United States. Seclusion, separation and even killing of the same refugees by armed Border Police in mass executions. Not to mention the number of deaths that would occur in the refugee camps from disease and hunger would also potentially be in the hundreds of thousands.

VIDEO LINK

Plus add in the use of CHEMTRAILS as a global cooling device as more then relevant and a confirmation that these do exist and are happening daily. This also shows that the idea of chemtrail spraying is definitely being discussed and/or encouraged by top leading scientists worldwide in some form or another.

I should not forget to mention the hi… (more)

InformationLiberation Analysis:

I saw some of this last night, it’s the most insane predictive programming I have ever seen, they tell some fictionalized story of a woman’s life in the future where the entire world is destroyed due to overpopulation, global warming and resource depletion.

The earth is a hellhole, the whole middle of the United States is an unlivable desert with no water, they tell a fictional story of a plague killing people en masse and how everyone has to be quarantined to fight it, the US is in total bedlam but NY and California are the only places you can live because they are “sustainable” cities.

The ‘fictional’ character who is telling the story speaks of how much ‘hope’ she gets from seeing all the solar technologies etc., as she is saying all this they have some musical interlude where they have Obama’s voice speaking about how all the changes we made in the past saved us (in the shows present) etc. It really sounded like Obama actually personally recorded this in a studio just for this propaganda piece.

At the end they say how this whole disaster scenario is not set in stone, and how we can avert catastrophe (even though they made this whole thing up) if we only change our way of life and re-engineer our entire society through living “sustainably.” What they don’t tell you something like air conditioning is not considered sustainable, eating meat is not considered sustainable, having appliances in your house is not sustainable, having suburban housing is not sustainable, driving a car or using any fossil fuels is not sustainable, these are all things globalist millionaires like Maurice Strong (who no doubt lives a life of poverty and chastity) feel must no longer be allowed to be used by those of us in the “affluent middle class.”

We are talking about the total destruction of our entire way of life, turning the US into a literal third world dictatorship where the new crimes will be things like taking too many showers, using too much air conditioning, using too much heating, failing to recycle, throwing away too much trash, etc. If these people get their way it will be hell on earth, this propaganda is so dangerous it must be exposed for what it is.

“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing - are not sustainable.” - Maurice Strong, Rio Earth Summit

“We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.” - Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports

“Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.” - Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC

“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” - Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace

“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” - Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation

“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” - Christine Stewart, fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

“The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.” - emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

“We require a central organizing principle - one agreed to voluntarily. Minor shifts in policy, moderate improvement in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change - these are all forms of appeasement, designed to satisfy the public’s desire to believe that sacrifice, struggle and a wrenching transformation of society will not be necessary.” - Al Gore, Earth in the Balance

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsiblity to bring that about?” - Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme

“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-development means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.” - Paul Ehrlich, Professor of Population Studies

“The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.” - Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund

“Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.” - Professor Maurice King

“Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it.” - Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute

“The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.” - Jeremy Rifkin, Greenhouse Crisis Foundation

“Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.” - Prof Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University

“The big threat to the planet is people: there are too many, doing too well economically and burning too much oil.” – Sir James Lovelock, BBC Interview

“My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.” -Dave Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!

“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” - Ted Turner, founder of CNN and major UN donor

“… the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million but less than one billion.” - Club of Rome, Goals for Mankind

“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.” - Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, patron of the World Wildlife Fund

“I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.” - John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal

“The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing.” - Christopher Manes, Earth First!

“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.” - David Brower, first Executive Director of the Sierra Club

===============================================================================

Weaponized Education: Controlling Tomorrow With The Youth of Today

Amy de Miceli
noonehastodietomorrow.com
Friday, June 5, 2009

There has been and continues to be an effort by some of the worlds most elite families to establish a global community, with a global government, some call it the new world order.The plan always benefits them at our expense, and they beleive as long as we show no opposition they can retain control. The massive goal is to bring the global populace into harm-ony, but it is an impossibility unless family loyalty is dissolved and individuality is eradicated.

Psychological force has been introduced to achieve their world domination, and it is our children’s minds that are being attacked most viciously. The crux of which is being done at school, through both passive and aggressive formulas.

Our enemy is ruthless, picking us off one community at a time, using a multi prong approach inside American schools, Pavlovian behavioral techniques, coupled with soviet brainwashing and scariest of all, trauma based mind control (which also sheds light on a disgusting display of the most power hungry men and women in uniform).

Soviet brainwashing techniques have been a part of the overall agenda of mass education for well over a hundred years, but today the globalists are flaunting their agenda. As recently as April of 2009 UNESCO announced its plan to promote their Earth Charter to encourage all children to become responsible, “global citizens in the 21st century”. The charter is a loaded document that also promotes, redistribution of wealth, “among nations” (communism).

One system already promoting that exact agenda is the International Bacceulette (IB) Program, which claims to be an ‘elite’ international education, and it is being implemented in 2,591 schools in 134 countries.

Miami Beach Florida has been the most recent community to adopt the IB Program, and it will be the only curriculum used throughout the entire city for all grade levels. The announcement was made shortly after the IB council met in Miami in March 2009.

The IB was founded in 1968 in Switzerland, and was an offshoot of the International School of Geneva, which was founded in part by the League of Nations, and it is where IB’s founding Director, John Goormaghtigh, served as chairman of the Board prior to IB. Goormaghtigh also served as the director of the European Centre of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, whose nefarious goal of ‘controlling the education in the united states’ had been previously revealed by the Reece commission in the early 1950’s.

“In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them.” - Dr. Mary Jo Bane

This is how the ruling class does it, when they are exposed they merely change a few things and have another go at us. They believe that the key to controlling our minds as adults is to dominate us as children, when we are impressionable. They get us all inside our schools away from the influence (and loving care) of our parents, and sadly it does get worse.

“It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity…. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government.” -David Rockefeller

Since Columbine, and 9/11 the ante has been upped, trauma based mind control has been added to their arsenal. Using terrorism drills, not to capture terrorists but to define them. The most terrifying drills are taking place inside public schools, usually without warning for the parents, or teachers and worst of all, the unsuspecting children who will see little difference between a real terrorist or a masked man acting like one.

“The children were in that room …begging for their lives, because they thought there was someone with a gun after them,” -Mother of mock victim

Some drills are terrorizing children as young as five years old. A stranger comes plowing through a classroom door, wielding a gun shouting at everyone splattered in fake blood. Children are screaming and crying and wetting their pants. The conditions are torturous, no food or water for hours, no access to restrooms, and no way of knowing when it will end, some drills have gone past normal school hours. This is known as trauma based mind control, and it would be called abuse if it wasn’t being promoted by the Department of Homeland Security and acted out inside our public schools.

Their drills are specific, the mock terrorists are homeschoolers, angry parents, and Christians, they tote guns and bombs, leaving the mock victims wondering who the “terrorists” really are. Imposing the idea that people we are familiar with (a father, classmate, or neighbor) could be terrorists, (and they may not even know it) leaves a suspicious paranoid population.

It is plain to see that they are the terrorists, no matter what or who they dress up as, the “authorities” are the ones terrorizing us and these scenarios are not preparing our children for anything other than how to be afraid, and how to be a slave, condition them now, control them later.

“In this new world system international education will become more indispensable than ever, but also more possible.” - John Goormaghtigh

“the real goal of the earth charter is that it will in fact become like the ten commandments.” — Maurice Strong

===============================================================================

House Bill Proposes Commission to Explore National Servitude

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
June 5, 2009

Back in November, after sweeping the election, Obama’s crew removed language from his official website calling for mandatory service for all Americans. “Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year,” the site said before the document was scrubbed in response to criticism.

Obama and the Democrats are wedded to the idea of mandatory service. In December 2007, Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd proposed making community service mandatory for all high school students and proposed “encouraging service by adults by offering tax credits to employers who give workers paid time off to volunteer and $1,000 grants for seniors who help out in schools,” MSNBC reported.

In 2006, Rahm Emanuel, now Obama’s chief of staff, published a book entitled “The Plan.” In the book Emanuel argues for universal service for all “Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five [who] will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.”

Democrats love the idea of involuntary servitude. “For America now, service is not just an option, but an obligation of citizenship,” said John Kerry during the 2004 election. In the 110th congress Charles Rangel introduced the Universal National Service Act H.R.393, a bill that would have required all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service for a period of two years.

National service is feel-good code for slavery. It is prohibited by the 13th amendment.

In March, both the House and Senate passed a bill tripling the AmeriCorps program. Called the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, or GIVE Act, the law “encourages” Americans to “give back to their communities,” Fox News reported. Republicans attempted to attach an amendment to the bill prohibiting for-profit political and labor groups that engage in legislative advocacy from receiving “assistance” under the plan, but the amendment was tabled.

We need your service, right now,” Obama declared as he signed the bill. “I’m asking you to stand up and play your part. I’m asking you to help change history’s course… and if you do, I promise you, your life will be richer.”

Obama and Congress will eventually do more than merely ask “you to stand up and play your part” — they will legislate it. In March, H.R. 1444 was introduced in the House by a gaggle of Democrats. The bill will “establish the Congressional Commission on Civic Service to study methods of improving and promoting volunteerism and national service, and for other purposes.”

H.R. 1444 is sponsored by Rep. Jim McDermott, a Washington state Democrat, and is assigned to the House Committee on Labor and Education. It reintroduces language calling for universal servitude stripped from H.R. 1388, the so-called GIVE (to government) bill.

In Section 4. of the proposed bill, entitled “Duties,” we find the following: “The effect on the Nation, on those who serve, and on the families of those who serve, if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service.” (Emphasis added.) A “workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement” is proposed “for all able young people.”

In addition, the Commission will investigate how to rope older Americans into a national servitude program. “Whether current Federal volunteer programs are suited to address the special skills and needs of senior volunteers, and if not, how these programs can be improved such that the Federal government can effectively promote service among the ‘baby boomer’ generation,” the bill states.

The Commission will also explore the creation of a “public service academy, a 4-year institution that offers a federally funded undergraduate education with a focus on training future public sector leaders.” Federal money would go to establish “a training program on college campuses to recruit and educate college students for national service.”

As Obama said during his GIVE signing speech, he wants to create “a generation of activists” to work with “nonprofit organizations” — that is to say, foundation NGOs — to “strengthen the Nation” as determined by the government and the corporations and bankers that own it

Our rulers are itching to implement “an era of common sacrifice,” as the Trilateralist David and Bohemian Grove attendee Gergen has called it. “David Gergen is perhaps the most vocal proponent of a new wave of ’social entrepreneurs’ whose businesses are modeled on a ‘more-than-profit’ basis. Most of these groups aim to incorporate a partnership between the public & private sectors (sometimes known as fascism),” writes Aaron Dykes.

Gergen and his one-world buddies consider us little more than a disposable ciphers to be used in their scheme to realize “a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole,” as Carrol Quigley noted.

In order to usher in the New Feudalism, the youth — and the baby boomers — will not only need to be brainwashed into accepting “an era of common sacrifice,” they will need to be forced by law to sacrifice and become slaves for the ruling elite.

===============================================================================

Government Demands Inventory of All VFW Weapons

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
June 9, 2009

An Infowars reader has passed along an email sent to VFW commanders by the Assistant Adjutant of the Department of Texas Veterans of Foreign Wars indicating the U.S. Army TACOM (Tactical Army Command) is demanding an inventory of all weapons held by VFW posts.

	Email sent to VFW commanders Inventory form

“While you may have had possession of this equipment for 20, 40, 60 or 100 years,” the email states, “it still belongs to the U.S. Military.”

The email arrived with an inventory attachment where all weapons are to be listed and the document sent to the Department of Texas Veterans of Foreign Wars. “This form will then be bounced off of the central database of all Texas VFW Posts at U.S. Army TACOM to verify serial numbers of each item that has been issued. This is a very extensive list and goes back to before the VFW was founded. So if you have a cannon from the Spanish-American War — it’s on the list.”

Many VFW halls around the country have decommissioned military weapons on their properties along with uniforms, statues and flags from every era. It is a common practice for VFW honor guard units to use M-1 rifles made into blank firing devices for salutes at parades and funerals. Weapons held by VFW posts are generally kept under lock and key in storage rooms.

TACOM is not simply interested in blank firing devices and antique rifles and pistols, however. “Weapons and Equipment consist of but is not limited to, Rifles, Pistols, Mortars, Artillery, Tanks, Vehicles, Aircraft, Missiles, Aircraft Carriers (sic), etc, from any period.”

The inventory of weapons at VFW posts is further evidence the government does not trust veterans, even with antiquated and non-functioning military equipment used primarily for display and historical purposes.

Last month the government took the unprecedented step of requiring soldiers at Fort Campbell in Kentucky to disclose all of their privately owned weapons and gun licenses.

“Military officials insist the policy is not connected to a recent controversial Department of Homeland Security report that warned disgruntled veterans could pose a national security threat. Rather, the inventory of private guns is aimed at stemming what the Army claims is an increasing number of accidental discharges by gun-toting soldiers,” NewsMax reported on May 5.

On June 5, WorldNetDaily reported that Fort Bliss in Texas had informed soldiers who live off the premises to provide descriptions, serial numbers, calibers, makes and models of any of the guns they own privately.

===============================================================================

Ron Paul Talks Foreign Policy: New Face, Same Policy

Kathleen Wells
The Huffington Post
June 9, 2009

Kathleen Wells: As a member of the U. S. House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs Committee, what is your take on this issue of torture?

Congressman Ron Paul: Well, it’s against the law - both our law and international law. So, we shouldn’t do it. And I’m against it for personal, moral reasons. I think it’s horrible. And for practical reasons, I think it’s absolutely worthless. And if we are serious about getting information, if we use other techniques, we actually get more information.

Kathleen Wells: So, you do believe that we were committing torture in our interrogations in Guantanamo?

Congressman Ron Paul: I don’t think the pictures I’ve seen were fictitious - the ones that were released a year or two ago. And, obviously, there are some more pictures of torture that they draw more attention to because they refuse to release them, which means that it must be a true indictment of what they were doing.

Kathleen Wells: What are your thoughts on President Obama’s decision to release the torture memos?

Congressman Ron Paul: I think he is purely political. I think he has backed down on what he said. He was elected for change and it is the same old stuff and he is as much of a neo-con now as Bush was with this issue and other issues. The war has been expanded. He continues with not closing down Guantanamo. There is probably, for as most [sic] as we can tell, there is still secret rendition going on. We just moved some of this process overseas. We are not going to be aware of it in detail.

Kathleen Wells: You feel President Obama is a neo-con like Bush? You don’t see a distinction between the two administrations?

Congressman Ron Paul: The tone is different, but the policies don’t change. We are spreading the war. The war is expanding. We are not prosecuting those that committed torture. Guantanamo is not going to be closed down. So, no, I don’t see [a distinction between Bush and Obama].

He [Obama] increased the DOD [Department of Defense] budget. We surely could spend some of that money at home where people are really hurting. But we increased the DOD budget, I think, by 10-percent. I can’t see any significant change in foreign policy. The pretense in leaving Iraq was a mild pretense and I’m predicting that’s not going to happen. There are going to be troops in Iraq throughout this administration, I’m convinced.

Kathleen Wells: Why are you convinced?

Congressman Ron Paul: Because I don’t think anyone wants to face the difficulties that might ensue. The problems came from us being there and when we leave, the problems will probably accelerate a bit. And then they will blame leaving for [causing] the problems and, yet, the real problem was going in. So, I think the international pressure that we get from various allies will be so great that we won’t leave. And just don’t expect the policies to change.

It just goes along with what I have said for years. Foreign policy does not change with Republicans or Democrats. Overall, there is very little policy that changes. There is a lot of debate and a lot of rhetoric, but things continue as they do

When Clinton was in, the Republicans condemned his Somalia problem. Bush said he wasn’t going to be a nation builder and a policeman of the world and he gets in and he is worse. Obama says Bush is terrible and gets in and all of a sudden, guess who is cheering Obama on right now? People like [Senator] Lindsay Graham. The real hawks of the Republican Party are sorta enjoying this right now. They figure they are winning these fights.

Kathleen Wells: Can you give me your thoughts on former Vice President Dick Cheney’s recent speech on interrogation techniques and national security?

Congressman Ron Paul: I [didn't] expect anything brand new. He … just [tried] to defend what he had been doing and his involvement over the years. He’ll keep saying that he saved many lives by torturing - which I don’t believe for a minute.

I’m more likely to believe Matthew Alexander and his position on torture. Matthew Alexander was an official that was involved. He was in the Air Force, but he was over there and he carried out over 300 interrogations over there and was very, very successful. But [he] refused orders to ever participate in anything violent or anything that hinted of torture. That is the evidence - you can get more information, rather than less [without using torture].

I think the evidence is now coming out of people saying that the torture wasn’t intended to get information. They got a lot of information from these individuals - these few, these three that are well known now. They got a lot of information from them before they were tortured. They were trying to get them to say that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein in order to justify this illegal war.

Kathleen Wells: Elaborate on why you believe there is no difference between the Obama Administration and the Bush Administration?

Congressmen Ron Paul: In style, they are different. The tone is different and I think there is a benefit to that. But his policies don’t change. Ultimately, policies win out. The strong statements against Iran are still there. And, right now, going through our committee (the Congressional International Relations Committee/the Foreign Affairs Committee), stronger sanctions will be put on Iran - just looking for another fight. And we have taken the position we will not allow them to proceed on any nuclear testing, even if it is within the law and even if it is done peacefully. We are not going to permit that. So no, that position hasn’t changed.

Like I said before, the war is not winding down in Iraq. The violence is increasing. And war is expanding into Afghanistan, sending more troops there. And now we are taking on Pakistan. And, actually, the whole Pakistan thing is just a reflection of a very, very flawed foreign policy of ours. Because we chase the Taliban around and some go into Pakistan and we urge the public government there to do this and that, we are just working very hard to have another war in Pakistan.

Kathleen Wells: What would you be doing differently if you were President? I know you were a Presidential primary candidate.

Congressman Ron Paul: I would bring the troops home. I’d just bring them all home. I’d bring them home from Korea. I’d bring them home from Germany. Save hundreds of billions of dollars and that would be a real boost. In order to stimulate the economy, I would immediately suspend the income tax for everybody.

The money we get into the hands of the people - that would cost less money than these hundreds of billions of dollars of bailouts that go into the pockets of the privileged who then get to take their retirement benefits and all their bonuses. I would do it a lot differently.

Foreign policy, though, would be the big thing. Just move away from that. Take off the sanctions and start trading with Cuba. Not just talk about it, but go ahead and do it.

Kathleen Wells: And Iran?

Congressman Ron Paul: I would treat them like we treated the Soviets. We talked to them. The Soviets had 30,000 nuclear weapons. Iran is not going to bomb anybody. They deserve a little bit of protection for themselves. They have nuclear weapons to the north, to the south, to the east, and to the west and all they do is get beat up. There are a bunch of bad people over there, but there are a bunch of bad people all over the world.

Khrushchev wasn’t exactly the nicest guy in the world and he claimed he was going to bury us, too. Even guys like Ronald Reagan talked to him and we worked things out. Their economic system collapsed.

What we ought to do is pay more attention to the goals of Osama Bin Laden. He said, “We will bring you to your knees through your bankruptcy because we are going to drag you over here and we will drain you and we will eventually bring on an economic crisis in your country.” Right now he is winning. Right now the Iraqis are closely aligned with the Iranians. The Shiites are winning. The Sunnis are on the run. We’ve weaponized the whole area. More guns sent over there by the American taxpayer. The Sunnis are all armed. It’s just a very, very ridiculous foreign policy.

===============================================================================

Obama Warns not to challenge Official 9/11 Story

Youtube
Sunday, June 7, 2009

VIDEO LINK

===============================================================================

Where Your Federal Tax Dollars Go

Click image to see larger version. Note: this is a large file.

===============================================================================

For Daily Updates On The Globalist Activities Go To ;

http://www.infowars.com/ 

Featured Stories archive

Economic crisis archive

World news archive

Police state archive

World at war archive

Big Brother archive

September 11 archive

Globalism archive

War on terror archive

Science & technology archive

Ron Paul archive

Border control & illegal immigration archive

U.S. News archive

Iraq archive

Iran archive

Media archive

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Listen to the
Alex Jones Show Now
Listen with Windows Media Player
Need More Internet Streaming Options?
Go to the Listen Page

The Alex Jones Sunday Edition

Get the Podcast

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not always have been specifically Authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is available without profit to those who have expressed an interest in the included information for research and educational purposes.